Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Archiving LD to DVD

Tags:
  • Laser Disc Players
  • DVD
  • Video Capture
Last response: in Home Theatre Legacy
Share
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 4:17:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Hi,

I'm interested in archiving some of my LDs to DVD and don't know where to
start. I looks like none of the stand alone DVD recorders will accept 5.1
audio input (please correct me if I'm wrong, I've just started looking at
them and don't understand all the technology yet) which means I should be
directing my attentions to video capture cards and sound cards for a PC.
Does anyone have any experience with this or know of any good resources in
print or on the web that I can read? Any specific cards I should be looking
at or avoiding?

Thanks,

Chris in NC

More about : archiving dvd

Anonymous
May 11, 2004 5:15:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <rYUnc.30149$jU.2035351@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
"CCARPENTER2" <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in archiving some of my LDs to DVD and don't know where to
> start. I looks like none of the stand alone DVD recorders will accept 5.1
> audio input (please correct me if I'm wrong, I've just started looking at
> them and don't understand all the technology yet) which means I should be
> directing my attentions to video capture cards and sound cards for a PC.
> Does anyone have any experience with this or know of any good resources in
> print or on the web that I can read? Any specific cards I should be looking
> at or avoiding?
>
There are a couple of ways to 'archive' LD to DVD. The highest quality
would be to use a full component capture card, with a high quality
3D comb filter based composite to component converter. Then, after
capturing, you'd convert that component video into MPEG2 for the DVD
(using the appropriate tools.) The bad news: the component domain
HW/SW isn't convieniently available at low cost. So, you won't find
that being done at the hobbyist or all but the highest level of tools.

A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
Canopus.) Then, use normal editing tools to edit the video.
Then, I happen to use the tmpgenc tools for authoring and conversion.
Due to the limited quality of composite video, the actual quality
loss when using DV25 isn't too severe. Component capture would
be a little better, but other quality issues tend to be more
important. My results using this approach are as close to perfection
as I could expect. The bad (actually horrible) news is that tmpgenc
MPEG2 encoding is incredibly slow when using noise reduction.
(Note: the ADVC300 seems better than it really is, but it is better
than other alternatives that I have tried. The quality, when using
the lowest level of noise reduction and with other conservative
settings is between excellent and supurb.) LDs are almost all too
noisy to be optimally converted to DV25 without noise reduction
before the conversion process. (Noise is an anathema to DV25,
and even worse for MPEG2.)

There are other good second approaches.

John
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 5:56:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>
> A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
> best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
> Canopus.) Then, use normal editing tools to edit the video.
> Then, I happen to use the tmpgenc tools for authoring and conversion.
> Due to the limited quality of composite video, the actual quality
> loss when using DV25 isn't too severe. Component capture would
> be a little better, but other quality issues tend to be more
> important. My results using this approach are as close to perfection
> as I could expect. The bad (actually horrible) news is that tmpgenc
> MPEG2 encoding is incredibly slow when using noise reduction.
> (Note: the ADVC300 seems better than it really is, but it is better
> than other alternatives that I have tried. The quality, when using
> the lowest level of noise reduction and with other conservative
> settings is between excellent and supurb.) LDs are almost all too
> noisy to be optimally converted to DV25 without noise reduction
> before the conversion process. (Noise is an anathema to DV25,
> and even worse for MPEG2.)
>
> There are other good second approaches.
>
> John

Could you compare the Canopus you mention with a Matrox RT2000 card or
X.100? What is the difference between an AVI you would capture with the
Matrox and DV25 you are talking about?

You talk about composite... isn't S-video just as good if not better?

Excuse my ignorance, I've seen discussions like this before but the
equipment they mentioned in the past was way out of price range. This
Canopus equipment is actually far cheaper than the latest Matrox card.
Related resources
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 5:56:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On Tue, 11 May 2004 01:56:33 GMT, Bernie Woodham <birnhamwood@insightbb.com> wrote:
>You talk about composite... isn't S-video just as good if not better?

LD's video is stored composite. The real question is where is the better comb
filter? In the LD player, or in the capture card? Considering the
technological differences of when LD vs. capture card was manufactured, the
capture card is most likely to have a more sophisticated comb filter.
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 8:20:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

> There are a couple of ways to 'archive' LD to DVD. The highest quality
> would be to use a full component capture card, with a high quality
> 3D comb filter based composite to component converter. Then, after
> capturing, you'd convert that component video into MPEG2 for the DVD
> (using the appropriate tools.) The bad news: the component domain
> HW/SW isn't convieniently available at low cost. So, you won't find
> that being done at the hobbyist or all but the highest level of tools.
>
> A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
> best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
> Canopus.) Then, use normal editing tools to edit the video.
> Then, I happen to use the tmpgenc tools for authoring and conversion.
> Due to the limited quality of composite video, the actual quality
> loss when using DV25 isn't too severe. Component capture would
> be a little better, but other quality issues tend to be more
> important. My results using this approach are as close to perfection
> as I could expect. The bad (actually horrible) news is that tmpgenc
> MPEG2 encoding is incredibly slow when using noise reduction.
> (Note: the ADVC300 seems better than it really is, but it is better
> than other alternatives that I have tried. The quality, when using
> the lowest level of noise reduction and with other conservative
> settings is between excellent and supurb.) LDs are almost all too
> noisy to be optimally converted to DV25 without noise reduction
> before the conversion process. (Noise is an anathema to DV25,
> and even worse for MPEG2.)
>
> There are other good second approaches.
>
> John

First and foremost Thank You for the excellent information John!

Ok so I'll admit the first paragraph lost me already but from the sound of
it it's very expensive and not an option for me. The ADVC300 is doable and
it sounds like you've had success using it. That takes care of the raw
video (and audio?) import. Will it capture the AC3 stream from the LD so
that you can have 5.1 on the DVD? When you talk about editing the video what
is it that is required? Taking out pauses as the LD switches sides? Or is
it more involved than that? Is there a particular software package that is
better than others for editing keeping in mind the only reason I know that I
would have this equipment and software is for this particular purpose?

Soooo many questions! Trying to learn as much as I can and am not having
much success doing web searches for this process.

Thanks again,

Chris in NC
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 10:14:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"CCARPENTER2" <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:

>Soooo many questions! Trying to learn as much as I can and
>am not having much success doing web searches for this process.

Have you checked out www.videohelp.com ?? (formerly known as
dvdrhelp.com and vcdhelp.com)

-- jayembee
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 4:33:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"jayembee" <jayembeenospam@snurcher.com> wrote in message > Have you checked
out www.videohelp.com ?? (formerly known as
> dvdrhelp.com and vcdhelp.com)
>
> -- jayembee

Hi Jayembee,

Hadn't found that site on my own. Thanks a lot!

Chris in NC
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 8:14:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <lpWnc.67059$Ik.4976834@attbi_s53>,
"Bernie Woodham" <birnhamwood@insightbb.com> writes:
>
>>
>> A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
>> best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
>> Canopus.) Then, use normal editing tools to edit the video.
>> Then, I happen to use the tmpgenc tools for authoring and conversion.
>> Due to the limited quality of composite video, the actual quality
>> loss when using DV25 isn't too severe. Component capture would
>> be a little better, but other quality issues tend to be more
>> important. My results using this approach are as close to perfection
>> as I could expect. The bad (actually horrible) news is that tmpgenc
>> MPEG2 encoding is incredibly slow when using noise reduction.
>> (Note: the ADVC300 seems better than it really is, but it is better
>> than other alternatives that I have tried. The quality, when using
>> the lowest level of noise reduction and with other conservative
>> settings is between excellent and supurb.) LDs are almost all too
>> noisy to be optimally converted to DV25 without noise reduction
>> before the conversion process. (Noise is an anathema to DV25,
>> and even worse for MPEG2.)
>>
>> There are other good second approaches.
>>
>> John
>
> Could you compare the Canopus you mention with a Matrox RT2000 card or
> X.100? What is the difference between an AVI you would capture with the
> Matrox and DV25 you are talking about?
>
If they don't do noise reduction before conversion, then they don't do as
good. I have played with several kinds of converters (both inside and
external of commercial video decks.) The 3D comb (again, if they don't
do 3D comb, then they wont' extract the maximum quality) is a major
component of the excellence of the ADVC300. I am not suggesting that
the ADVC300 is the only answer, but it is the best that I have played
with.

I didn't play with the Matrox RT2000 (isn't it just S-Video or composite
with 2d comb?) I needed to provide a way to fully decode COMPOSITE.

>
> You talk about composite... isn't S-video just as good if not better?
>
Only the very best LD players supply a 'good enough' S-Video output. It
is usually best to use a recent vintage composite decoder.

>
> Excuse my ignorance, I've seen discussions like this before but the
> equipment they mentioned in the past was way out of price range. This
> Canopus equipment is actually far cheaper than the latest Matrox card.
>
A good 3D comb is critical. If the Matrox has a good 3D comb, then
it has a chance of working very well. (I have seen the output of
some multi-line combs -- I have several, and they can be good in certain
circumstances, but not the best when there needs to be good 3D noise
reduction.) I'd have a higher probability of using a 5-line comb (or
more) philips based decoder if the source was pristine. LD isn't
pristine.

For DV, you need noise reduction BEFORE capture (or conversion to DV)!!!

John
May 11, 2004 8:27:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I haven't been there for about a year, but doom9.net has lots of good info
for manipulating mpeg and video capture media.



"CCARPENTER2" <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:zK3oc.11516$zq4.975793@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> "jayembee" <jayembeenospam@snurcher.com> wrote in message > Have you
checked
> out www.videohelp.com ?? (formerly known as
> > dvdrhelp.com and vcdhelp.com)
> >
> > -- jayembee
>
> Hi Jayembee,
>
> Hadn't found that site on my own. Thanks a lot!
>
> Chris in NC
>
>
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 12:37:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <slrnca0fi0.cds.The-Central-Scrutinizer@linux.client.comcast.net>,
TCS <The-Central-Scrutinizer@p.o.b.o.x.com> writes:
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 01:56:33 GMT, Bernie Woodham <birnhamwood@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>You talk about composite... isn't S-video just as good if not better?
>
> LD's video is stored composite. The real question is where is the better comb
> filter? In the LD player, or in the capture card? Considering the
> technological differences of when LD vs. capture card was manufactured, the
> capture card is most likely to have a more sophisticated comb filter.
>
Even the multi-line 2D comb filters that are likely common nowadays
are better than the simple combs in LD players. I have a Pioneer 3070
that has a rock solid, primitive 2D comb -- but is far below almost
every other comb (composite decoder) in my set of tools.

I have one 2D comb residing in a Hauppauge PVR350 (which I don't
generally use) which does a fairly good job of decoding. There
are probably SOME cases where it is better than a lousy 3D comb,
because of the lags that can happen with a 3D comb.

John

John
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 12:39:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <9wYnc.21728$V_.944001@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
"CCARPENTER2" <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> writes:
>> There are a couple of ways to 'archive' LD to DVD. The highest quality
>> would be to use a full component capture card, with a high quality
>> 3D comb filter based composite to component converter. Then, after
>> capturing, you'd convert that component video into MPEG2 for the DVD
>> (using the appropriate tools.) The bad news: the component domain
>> HW/SW isn't convieniently available at low cost. So, you won't find
>> that being done at the hobbyist or all but the highest level of tools.
>>
>> A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
>> best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
>> Canopus.) Then, use normal editing tools to edit the video.
>> Then, I happen to use the tmpgenc tools for authoring and conversion.
>> Due to the limited quality of composite video, the actual quality
>> loss when using DV25 isn't too severe. Component capture would
>> be a little better, but other quality issues tend to be more
>> important. My results using this approach are as close to perfection
>> as I could expect. The bad (actually horrible) news is that tmpgenc
>> MPEG2 encoding is incredibly slow when using noise reduction.
>> (Note: the ADVC300 seems better than it really is, but it is better
>> than other alternatives that I have tried. The quality, when using
>> the lowest level of noise reduction and with other conservative
>> settings is between excellent and supurb.) LDs are almost all too
>> noisy to be optimally converted to DV25 without noise reduction
>> before the conversion process. (Noise is an anathema to DV25,
>> and even worse for MPEG2.)
>>
>> There are other good second approaches.
>>
>> John
>
> First and foremost Thank You for the excellent information John!
>
> Ok so I'll admit the first paragraph lost me already but from the sound of
> it it's very expensive and not an option for me. The ADVC300 is doable and
> it sounds like you've had success using it. That takes care of the raw
> video (and audio?) import. Will it capture the AC3 stream from the LD so
> that you can have 5.1 on the DVD?
>
I haven't done any 5.1 stuff.

>
> When you talk about editing the video what
> is it that is required? Taking out pauses as the LD switches sides?
>
Mostly, yes.

>
> Soooo many questions! Trying to learn as much as I can and am not having
> much success doing web searches for this process.
>
PLEASE remember that I am stating my opinions, so for your purposes YOU
might find something better (or even eventually disagree!!!)

On a scale of 1-10 in 'absolute truth', I probably come close to an 8 :-).

John
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 2:21:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On Tue, 11 May 2004 04:20:21 GMT, "CCARPENTER2"
<ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:


>
>First and foremost Thank You for the excellent information John!
>
>Ok so I'll admit the first paragraph lost me already but from the sound of
>it it's very expensive and not an option for me. The ADVC300 is doable and
>it sounds like you've had success using it. That takes care of the raw
>video (and audio?) import. Will it capture the AC3 stream from the LD so
>that you can have 5.1 on the DVD? When you talk about editing the video what
>is it that is required? Taking out pauses as the LD switches sides? Or is
>it more involved than that? Is there a particular software package that is
>better than others for editing keeping in mind the only reason I know that I
>would have this equipment and software is for this particular purpose?
>
>Soooo many questions! Trying to learn as much as I can and am not having
>much success doing web searches for this process.
>
>Thanks again,
>
>Chris in NC
>

Send me your address and I will send you a dvd-r converted with the
panasonic stand alone dvd recorder.
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 2:44:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote in
<c7p9gd$1r03$1@news.iquest.net>:

>A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
>best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
>Canopus.)

The only problem with going through a DV25 codec is that you end up in a
4:1:0 colorspace when you convert to MPEG2. NTSC DV25 is 4:1:1 and DVD
MPEG2 is 4:2:0, so you end up with 4:1:0.

See, e.g., http://videoexpert.home.att.net/artic3/256dvcr.htm :

"This happens because a 4:2:0 sampling puts all the (R-Y) color
components on the odd scanning lines, and the (B-Y) components on the
even scanning lines. This effectively cuts the ( R-Y) vertical sharpness
in half (it's no longer on all lines), and does the same for the (B-Y)
component. If the 4:2:0 converter looks for color data and it is all
there (as when you start out with 4:2:2), the data gets used. Vertical
resolution is halved, but c'est la vie. If, however, the 4:2:0 converter
looks for color data and it's not there, which is half the time when you
start with just 4:1:1, the data doesn't get used, and you end up with
half the horizontal resolution. Then, because of the even/odd
machinations of 4:2:0, the vertical color resolution gets halved. Half
of a half is a quarter and the result is 4:1:0 sampling. Thus 4:1:1 when
converted to 4:2:0 makes twice as fuzzy color as when 4:2:2 changes to
4:2:0. This is one reason to prefer the 4:2:2 formats like Digital-S,
DVC PRO 50, and Digital Betacam."

Mike

--
To reply via email, replace deadspam dot com with comcast dot net.
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 9:17:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <lg63a0pfrtr67o0ivs1jkdr3nma5h21mg3@4ax.com>,
mjs39402@deadspam.com writes:
> toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote in
> <c7p9gd$1r03$1@news.iquest.net>:
>
>>A good second approach (and the approach that I use) is to use the
>>best composite to DV25 converter that you could find (ADVC300 from
>>Canopus.)
>
> The only problem with going through a DV25 codec is that you end up in a
> 4:1:0 colorspace when you convert to MPEG2. NTSC DV25 is 4:1:1 and DVD
> MPEG2 is 4:2:0, so you end up with 4:1:0.
>
Composite video doesn't really have as good as 4:1:0. The loss for
a standard composite source, using a 4:1:0 sampling (that isnt' really
colorspace per se) isn't really as significant as it sounds. (The
loss in vertical chroma resolution is guaranteed by DVD MPEG2 itself,
so the loss in horizontal chroma resolution relative to a nearly flat
1.5MHz is also going to be nil. With composite NTSC, you are lucky
to have 0.6MHz/1.2MHz, and that isn't usually very flat.)

If you are starting with a higher quality than composite, then the
difference could be more substantial.

So, it is VERY true that DV25 and DVD MPEG2 has a poor match WRT the
sampling, but for a composite source, you really don't have that much
chroma detail to start with.

The 4:2:2 vs. 4:2:0 vs. 4:1:1 thing is the reason why I have a full
D9 Suite (poor mans 4:2:2.)

John
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 9:38:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

The easiest way I have found, to get the best quality, is to first record the
disc on digital 8 tape. You can use a digital 8 camcorder or get a digital 8
deck (which I did). Then using my Phillips DVD recorder, I go digital to
digital to a DVD+RW disc. I can record ar 2 hours, 2-1/2 hours, 3 hours, 4
hours, or 6 hours on one disc depending on what quality I want. Once I am
happy with the master. I use my computer to make either a DVD+R or DVD-R disc.
The results are fantastic.
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 7:23:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <20040512013816.02202.00001049@mb-m13.aol.com>,
etvideo1@aol.com (ETVIDEO1) writes:
> The easiest way I have found, to get the best quality, is to first record the
> disc on digital 8 tape. You can use a digital 8 camcorder or get a digital 8
> deck (which I did).
>
Digital 8 recorders would seldom have 3D combs and noise reduction. Those
are mostly DV25 camcorders that use the Hi8 format, and I have found that
without good noise reduction before encoding, there will be loss of
detail (because DV25 doesn't like noise.)

John
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 7:42:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Hi John,

I saw doom9 mentioned quite a bit on the site jayembee pointed me to but
haven't had a chance to look at it yet. Lokking forward to more smoke
coming out of my ears ;-) Thank you for the pointer!


"john" <john@ispnamehere.ca> wrote in message
news:0Haoc.31033$FH5.795449@news20.bellglobal.com...
> I haven't been there for about a year, but doom9.net has lots of good info
> for manipulating mpeg and video capture media.
>
>
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 11:18:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I don't use a camcorder. I use a Sony GV-D 800 deck. I get one hour on a tape
which easily holds one side of the disc. I see no loss of quality.
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 1:44:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <20040512151855.18981.00001182@mb-m13.aol.com>,
etvideo1@aol.com (ETVIDEO1) writes:
> I don't use a camcorder. I use a Sony GV-D 800 deck. I get one hour on a tape
> which easily holds one side of the disc. I see no loss of quality.
>
It all depends upon your quality desires and needs.

I suggest careful comparison. My own criteria is based upon almost
total reduction of noise without loss of detail (which entails 3D
comb filtering and both careful 3D and 2D noise reduction) OR
full reproduction of the LD signal, including the smallest noise nits.
The 'noise' like artifacts in LD and the composite decoding artifacts
can actually contain video detail -- but can/will easily be lost during
DV25 encoding.

The reason for the either/or (full reproduction, or full quality noise
reduction) is for either having a totally cleaned
up master (that provides as close to full DVD capability as possible)
or maintain all of the signal for future processing. This is why I
have the combo of the really good ADVC300 (it is far beyond common
DV25 conversions) or the D9 decks (4:2:2) -- almost capable of recording
composite on the Y channel alone. The encode/decode process for the
DV50 format seems to maintain most of the composite signal integrity
thereby allowing for optimum future processing. (When trying to do
composite on the Y channel alone, there is color, but significantly distorted.
This wide bandwidth of the 4:2:2 channels allows for the composite
encode/decode cycle to maintain most of the detail. DV25 cannot
do that unless you do noise reduction beforehand, there is just not
enough 'room' in the signal for the noise like detail.) Noise is
also troublesome for MPEG2, so might as well do the noise reduction
BEFORE the DV25 encoding.

Before my ADVC300, I had used a combination of a professional TBC
(DPS290) which would fully correct the timing from the LD player.
(LD players are 'stable', but not really broadcast stable, and
some of my video equipment doesn't like nonstandard timing.) Then,
I use a 3D comb from a DVHS deck for Y/C seperation. That 3D comb
is better than the comb in other decks in my repetoire, and when
I need even more NR, I selectively enable the NR on the TBC.
(Transitions of ON/OFF for the TBC NR are seamless.) Then, I recorded
the resulting signal onto 4:2:2 DV50. The resulting signal was
significantly cleaner than the original LD, with all detail maintained,
and problems like 'large area' chroma (big areas of red) were almost
fully cleaned up -- not as good as the ADVC300.

With the ADVC300 (with proper settings), my results when recording
onto DV25 when using that A/D converter were BETTER than my complicated
setup. When producing DVDs from the DV25 signal, the resulting quality
(when using the NR in the purchased version of TMPGENC) has been
incredible!!! (The large red areas in the Bananarama videos appear
as rock stable as one might expect from BetaSP -- not perfect, but
more perfect than otherwise attainable.)

In my own experiments, I can produce superficially good image quality
with my DV25 deck or various other wierd combos of devices without
3D comb filters, but when doing a serious comparison of quality, it
is very clear that DV25 just doesn't like the noise associated with
LD and the decoding artifacts from composite video (or OTA video.) This
tends to produce a suboptimal picture that superficially removes some
of the noise, but then creating other 'artifacts' (which produce less
apparent detail.) I am NOT claiming that the picture quality isn't
probably better than SVHS, but you can do ALOT better yet if the
right equipment is used.

It just might be possible that your deck has a 3D comb and noise reduction
builtin. Given that possibility, then the image quality might be
the 'DVD' but a little softer that I have been able to achieve. (Again,
even large red areas are stable.)

John
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 3:41:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

If you want, I can send you a DVD and you can judge for yourself.
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 4:30:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

CCARPENTER2 <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:
: I'm interested in archiving some of my LDs to DVD and don't know where to
: start. I looks like none of the stand alone DVD recorders will accept 5.1
: audio input (please correct me if I'm wrong, I've just started looking at
: them and don't understand all the technology yet) which means I should be
: directing my attentions to video capture cards and sound cards for a PC.
: Does anyone have any experience with this or know of any good resources in
: print or on the web that I can read? Any specific cards I should be looking
: at or avoiding?

I'm about to record my first LD to DVD. This is my approach. I have a LifeView
FlyVideo 3000FM cheap video capture (TV Tuner) card with Philips based chipset.
Philips ADC (analog to digital converter) are used in professional cards like
Pinnacle PRO-ONE, Pinnacle DV500, Fast AV Master. So even though the card is
cheap the AD conversion is still going to be professionally looking.

Anyway, I'll plug either S-video or Composite to this capture card. For the
sound I will plug S/PDIF digital of LD player to my M-Audio Audiophile 2496
soundcard. On my LDs audio is recorded as 44.1kHz stereo. I'll capture it in
HUFFYUV AVI at 704x480 resolution 29.97fps. Once I get AVI file, I'll separate
audio from video and then I'll manually sync audio to video in case they don't
match. Then I'll convert WAV from 44.1kHz to 48kHz with SSRC converter. And
the rest will be taken care by TMPGEnc.

Your case is not so simple. You have 5.1. What you can do is to record a movie
say with a canopus card. Separate audio from video in AVI file. Then separately
record an audio using your soundcard digital to digital in 5.1. I don't know
how you can do 5.1. Ask in rec.audio.pro. Then compare these 2 WAV files using
a sound editor, adjust a newely recorded WAV file to match the original WAV.

Good luck.

leonid underscore makarovsky at yahoo dot com.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 4:32:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

TCS <The-Central-Scrutinizer@p.o.b.o.x.com> wrote:
: LD's video is stored composite. The real question is where is the better comb
: filter? In the LD player, or in the capture card? Considering the
: technological differences of when LD vs. capture card was manufactured, the
: capture card is most likely to have a more sophisticated comb filter.

I'll try both now and I'll let you know. But again my card is a cheapo
FlyVideo 3000FM.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 5:22:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On 13 May 2004 00:30:45 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@cs.bu.edu>
wrote:

>Your case is not so simple. You have 5.1. What you can do is to record a movie
>say with a canopus card. Separate audio from video in AVI file. Then separately
>record an audio using your soundcard digital to digital in 5.1. I don't know
>how you can do 5.1. Ask in rec.audio.pro. Then compare these 2 WAV files using
>a sound editor, adjust a newely recorded WAV file to match the original WAV.

Capping AC-3 isn't that tough. You can do it with some pretty cheap
sound cards. Mine does it, and cost about $50 CDN. Capture via S/PDIF
in CoolEdit, save as a WAV, process with BeSplit, and you're done!
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 7:35:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Hi and thanks for your input Leonid and Karyudo.

So the AC-3 stream is carried over the right analog channel (RCA jack) if I
recall correctly (actually on my LD it was modified and has its own jack).
I am assuming I should use my RF demodulator between the LD player and the
soundcard so that it converts the steam into something the soundcard can
deal with? Would it makes sense to run the stream from LD -> demodulator ->
Stereo Receiver -> soundcard? Or is that just inserting another source of
potential noise and signal degradation? Is a card such as the M-Audio
revolution a good card to use for this purpose? Is there a better solution
that doesn't exceed $150-$200? I'll check out the audio newsgroup as well
to see if they have any solutions.

Again many thanks for your help!

"Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote in message
news:c7ufjl$ou9$1@news3.bu.edu...
> CCARPENTER2 <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> : I'm interested in archiving some of my LDs to DVD and don't know where
to
> : start. I looks like none of the stand alone DVD recorders will accept
5.1
> : audio input (please correct me if I'm wrong, I've just started looking
at
> : them and don't understand all the technology yet) which means I should
be
> : directing my attentions to video capture cards and sound cards for a PC.
> : Does anyone have any experience with this or know of any good resources
in
> : print or on the web that I can read? Any specific cards I should be
looking
> : at or avoiding?
>
> I'm about to record my first LD to DVD. This is my approach. I have a
LifeView
> FlyVideo 3000FM cheap video capture (TV Tuner) card with Philips based
chipset.
> Philips ADC (analog to digital converter) are used in professional cards
like
> Pinnacle PRO-ONE, Pinnacle DV500, Fast AV Master. So even though the card
is
> cheap the AD conversion is still going to be professionally looking.
>
> Anyway, I'll plug either S-video or Composite to this capture card. For
the
> sound I will plug S/PDIF digital of LD player to my M-Audio Audiophile
2496
> soundcard. On my LDs audio is recorded as 44.1kHz stereo. I'll capture it
in
> HUFFYUV AVI at 704x480 resolution 29.97fps. Once I get AVI file, I'll
separate
> audio from video and then I'll manually sync audio to video in case they
don't
> match. Then I'll convert WAV from 44.1kHz to 48kHz with SSRC converter.
And
> the rest will be taken care by TMPGEnc.
>
> Your case is not so simple. You have 5.1. What you can do is to record a
movie
> say with a canopus card. Separate audio from video in AVI file. Then
separately
> record an audio using your soundcard digital to digital in 5.1. I don't
know
> how you can do 5.1. Ask in rec.audio.pro. Then compare these 2 WAV files
using
> a sound editor, adjust a newely recorded WAV file to match the original
WAV.
>
> Good luck.
>
> leonid underscore makarovsky at yahoo dot com.
>
> --Leonid
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 7:52:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

CCARPENTER2 <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:
: So the AC-3 stream is carried over the right analog channel (RCA jack) if I
: recall correctly (actually on my LD it was modified and has its own jack).

Why don't you want to use digital S/PDIF?

: I am assuming I should use my RF demodulator between the LD player and the
: soundcard so that it converts the steam into something the soundcard can
: deal with? Would it makes sense to run the stream from LD -> demodulator ->
: Stereo Receiver -> soundcard? Or is that just inserting another source of

Why?

: potential noise and signal degradation? Is a card such as the M-Audio
: revolution a good card to use for this purpose? Is there a better solution
: that doesn't exceed $150-$200? I'll check out the audio newsgroup as well
: to see if they have any solutions.

Do you already own M-Audio revolution? I don't think you can go wrong with
M-Audio. I would avoid SoundBlaster though.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 8:22:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
: (supports WDM captures, also free). This is a better combination than
: any DV solution, because there is no lossy compression applied.

I would question that one. Are you saying that this card gives a better image
quality on DVD project than $500 Canopus ADVC300? I'm not sure about that. I
never owened Canopus cards, but I know that they are very very good. The bad
thing is that they don't have S/PDIF or digital optical input.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 8:55:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Hi Leonid,

My (limited) understanding is that the digital out carries DTS not AC-3 and
I am interested in getting the Dolby Digital signal to DVD (although I will
probably play with the DTS signal as well). Again my understanding of this
is limited so please let me know if I'm wrong.

No I do not own an M-Audio Revolution at this point. A friend indicated
that it had great analog sound so he thought it might be a good card for
this purpose (plus I think he wanted to sell it to me cheap because it
didn't do what he wanted it to in his Home Theater PC). The addition of the
receiver to the stream because I think (I'll have to look at this closer to
find out for sure) that the receiver can pass Dolby Digital over digital
coax. Currently I only have mobo sound solutions and am not averse to
purchasing a decent card if it results in a better transfer of sound to the
final product. Thanks for the heads up on the Soundblasters :-)

Chris in NC

"Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote in message
news:c7urdr$lbr$2@news3.bu.edu...
> CCARPENTER2 <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> : So the AC-3 stream is carried over the right analog channel (RCA jack)
if I
> : recall correctly (actually on my LD it was modified and has its own
jack).
>
> Why don't you want to use digital S/PDIF?
>
> : I am assuming I should use my RF demodulator between the LD player and
the
> : soundcard so that it converts the steam into something the soundcard can
> : deal with? Would it makes sense to run the stream from LD ->
demodulator ->
> : Stereo Receiver -> soundcard? Or is that just inserting another source
of
>
> Why?
>
> : potential noise and signal degradation? Is a card such as the M-Audio
> : revolution a good card to use for this purpose? Is there a better
solution
> : that doesn't exceed $150-$200? I'll check out the audio newsgroup as
well
> : to see if they have any solutions.
>
> Do you already own M-Audio revolution? I don't think you can go wrong with
> M-Audio. I would avoid SoundBlaster though.
>
> --Leonid
>
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 9:09:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

CCARPENTER2 <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:
: My (limited) understanding is that the digital out carries DTS not AC-3 and

I'm not sure about LDs, and actually AC-3. All I know that if I have a DVD and
I play it on computer, my M-Audio Audiophile 2496 picks up 5.1 and delivers it
to receiver. That is guaranteed. So I assume LD player should pick up AC-3, but
I maybe wrong.

: No I do not own an M-Audio Revolution at this point. A friend indicated
: that it had great analog sound so he thought it might be a good card for
: this purpose (plus I think he wanted to sell it to me cheap because it
: didn't do what he wanted it to in his Home Theater PC). The addition of the

If you're not a gamer, this should be a great card for home theater and also
for digital to digital and analog to digital recording. I'll be looking into
Terratec Aureon Universe 7.1 which is a competitor card. It has more options
than Revolution (it has optical in/out, mic in, phono in with phone pre-amp),
but I believe Revolution has better converters.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 10:18:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote in message news:<c7u5rt$6ip$1@news.iquest.net>...

> With the ADVC300 (with proper settings), my results when recording
> onto DV25 when using that A/D converter were BETTER than my complicated
> setup. When producing DVDs from the DV25 signal, the resulting quality
> (when using the NR in the purchased version of TMPGENC) has been
> incredible!!! (The large red areas in the Bananarama videos appear
> as rock stable as one might expect from BetaSP -- not perfect, but
> more perfect than otherwise attainable.)

What are the proper settings?
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 6:16:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On 13 May 2004 03:48:48 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@cs.bu.edu>
wrote:

>I use paid Fly2000 program to capture. ($25). It does a much better job than
>VirtualVCR.

Hmm... I tried a whole pile of capture apps, and VirtualVCR was about
the only one that didn't crash spectacularly. I don't remember if I
tried Fly2000 or not. I'll look into it -- thanks! What does it do for
you to say it "does a much better job"?

> I also use Philips native drivers and not LifeView ones.

I don't suppose you could e-mail me the Philips drivers, could you? (I
assume they're pretty small.)

I've found most of the drivers are set up for the Philips 7134 chip,
as found in the PAL-spec 3000, rather than the 7133 found in NTSC-spec
cards. I had a very frustrating time of setup as a result. What are
you running (e.g. OS, PAL vs. NTSC, etc.)?
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 8:21:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <65354389.0405130518.46190ff2@posting.google.com>,
ctnabil@spiritone.com (Aaron Nabil) writes:
> toor@iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote in message news:<c7u5rt$6ip$1@news.iquest.net>...
>
>> With the ADVC300 (with proper settings), my results when recording
>> onto DV25 when using that A/D converter were BETTER than my complicated
>> setup. When producing DVDs from the DV25 signal, the resulting quality
>> (when using the NR in the purchased version of TMPGENC) has been
>> incredible!!! (The large red areas in the Bananarama videos appear
>> as rock stable as one might expect from BetaSP -- not perfect, but
>> more perfect than otherwise attainable.)
>
> What are the proper settings?
>
If you are encoding a laser disk, then you'd want to use the lowest
levels of noise reduction. This cleans enough noise that DV25 doesn't
have problems. DV25 can deal with noise better than DVD MPEG2 at
full rate, but still not perfect. Later on, then encode the MPEG2
with noise reduction enabled. It is important to choose tools that
don't add motion artifacts (e.g. smearing), and that is where the
ADVC 300 works well without significant motion artfacts (at the lowest
levels of noise reduction.)

There are numerous settings, but don't set anything above the minimums.
Also, make sure that you don't use edge enhacement (that is best
deferred until later.) I haven't booted WIN2000 recently, but if
I do so in the next several days, I'll copy down the ADVC300 settings.

John
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 7:21:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
:>I use paid Fly2000 program to capture. ($25). It does a much better job than
:>VirtualVCR.

: Hmm... I tried a whole pile of capture apps, and VirtualVCR was about
: the only one that didn't crash spectacularly. I don't remember if I
: tried Fly2000 or not. I'll look into it -- thanks! What does it do for
: you to say it "does a much better job"?

Well, the image quality is much sharper. I captured from the same source using
FlyVideo 3000FM with Fly2000 and also with Pinnacle DV500. Fly2000 gave a bit
better job than Pinnacle. VirtualVCR was pretty close to Conexant based cards.
Maybe I didn't adjust settings, I don't know.

:> I also use Philips native drivers and not LifeView ones.

: I don't suppose you could e-mail me the Philips drivers, could you? (I
: assume they're pretty small.)

I could, but you could also down them from here as well as a trial version of
Fly2000.

http://auzol.narod.ru/

: I've found most of the drivers are set up for the Philips 7134 chip,
: as found in the PAL-spec 3000, rather than the 7133 found in NTSC-spec
: cards. I had a very frustrating time of setup as a result. What are
: you running (e.g. OS, PAL vs. NTSC, etc.)?

I'm in US so I'm NTSC. But I also capture from PAL and SECAM VHS tapes. So I
need to be multistandard.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 8:35:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On 14 May 2004 03:21:46 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@cs.bu.edu>
wrote:

>I could, but you could also down them from here as well as a trial version of
>Fly2000.
>
>http://auzol.narod.ru/

Much obliged, Leonid.

>I'm in US so I'm NTSC. But I also capture from PAL and SECAM VHS tapes. So I
>need to be multistandard.

That's me, too, except I've got PAL LDs...
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 2:45:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote...
> That's me, too, except I've got PAL LDs...

I didn't know that they had PAL in Canada!

G, you owe me an e-mail... It's been a while. :-(

-Junior
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 2:35:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

In article <139de3b3.0405140945.2099d1f@posting.google.com>,
watsona@kenyon.edu (unclejr) writes:
> Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote...
>> That's me, too, except I've got PAL LDs...
>
> I didn't know that they had PAL in Canada!
>
PAL capable pro monitors aren't that uncommon (even I have one,
even though not able to enjoyably watch PAL50 because of flicker.)
Often, the pro monitors have practically ALL standards decoders built
in.

With hardware as it is today, it isn't too big a deal to have
a computer capture the output of a PAL device, and then display
it on a computer monitor (modulo proper gamma settings, etc.)

John
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 6:43:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
:>I'm in US so I'm NTSC. But I also capture from PAL and SECAM VHS tapes. So I
:>need to be multistandard.

: That's me, too, except I've got PAL LDs...

BTW, you know that with Philips drivers you should be capturing at 704x...
and not 720x.... This card doesn't support overscan. When you go from an LD
player, I suggest going S/PDIF out to your soundcard and capture digital sound
at 44.1kHz. It seems like audio will perfectly match video.

--Leonid
May 29, 2004 7:36:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

The long story short about grabbing the AC3 off of an LD is that you HAVE TO
use the RF demodulator for your (digital) soundcard to understand the
signal. At the time that the AC3 jack was being "retro-fitted" to Laserdisc
players, the technology wasn't advanced enough (or cheap enough) to fit the
RF-demod unit inside the LD player as well to convert the FM signal coming
off of the LD disc itself. Therfore the RF-demod unit was supplied as an
"extra" rather than as standard for all LD players since, but the AC3 output
jack is there on the LD player if and when the owner decides to buy the
additional RF-demod unit itself later on.

Basically, the RF-demodulator converts the AC3 jack signal off of the LD
player into exactly the same thing as what any old DVD player does through
the digital coaxial/optical cable. HOWEVER, this is NOT the same as the PCM
soundtrack (ie the digital track on your LD disc that houses the Pro-Logic
Surround soundtrack). Only a few LD players were ever fitted with a digital
PCM line-out (the same thing as a digital-out on certain CD players) so
usually you will only find a analog two-channel (L/R) output on a normal
everyday LD player to fit into any amplifier/ghettoblaster with AUX L/R
inputs.

Simplified, a PC soundcard (such as the Audigy series) has a digital input
from either a 3.5" jack or optical input, and these soundcards can accept
either an RF-demod'd AC3 signal or PCM digital-out from a suitably fitted LD
player. I'm assuming that the DTS track (which replaces the two-channel L/R
Pro-Logic soundtrack) on these enabled Laserdiscs can also be read in by
your PC's soundcard with the suitable software being run at the time.

Hope this helps. If anyone has any more queries regarding this issue, let
me know.

"Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote in message
news:c7uvtf$jak$1@news3.bu.edu...
> CCARPENTER2 <ccarpenter2@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> : My (limited) understanding is that the digital out carries DTS not AC-3
and
>
> I'm not sure about LDs, and actually AC-3. All I know that if I have a DVD
and
> I play it on computer, my M-Audio Audiophile 2496 picks up 5.1 and
delivers it
> to receiver. That is guaranteed. So I assume LD player should pick up
AC-3, but
> I maybe wrong.
>
> : No I do not own an M-Audio Revolution at this point. A friend indicated
> : that it had great analog sound so he thought it might be a good card for
> : this purpose (plus I think he wanted to sell it to me cheap because it
> : didn't do what he wanted it to in his Home Theater PC). The addition of
the
>
> If you're not a gamer, this should be a great card for home theater and
also
> for digital to digital and analog to digital recording. I'll be looking
into
> Terratec Aureon Universe 7.1 which is a competitor card. It has more
options
> than Revolution (it has optical in/out, mic in, phono in with phone
pre-amp),
> but I believe Revolution has better converters.
>
> --Leonid
Anonymous
May 29, 2004 9:08:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Rick <deNOBULLlorean@dodo.com.au> wrote:
: The long story short about grabbing the AC3 off of an LD is that you HAVE TO
: use the RF demodulator for your (digital) soundcard to understand the

So basically you're saying that the signal has to go through an analog phase,
right?

: the digital coaxial/optical cable. HOWEVER, this is NOT the same as the PCM
: soundtrack (ie the digital track on your LD disc that houses the Pro-Logic
: Surround soundtrack). Only a few LD players were ever fitted with a digital
: PCM line-out (the same thing as a digital-out on certain CD players) so

So my LD player has digital coaxial audio out. I have used it to connect it to
my sound card (M-Audio series) S/PDIF in. On LD itself it says Digital Audio.
Was I doing the right thing? I think that I got it right and the digital sound
sounded better than analog.

I did the video capture feeding sound just like I described above. I captured
the sound at 44.1kHz and as a post process resampled it to 48kHz for DVD.

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 29, 2004 10:24:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On 29 May 2004 17:08:30 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@cs.bu.edu>
wrote:

>Rick <deNOBULLlorean@dodo.com.au> wrote:
>: The long story short about grabbing the AC3 off of an LD is that you HAVE TO
>: use the RF demodulator for your (digital) soundcard to understand the
>
>So basically you're saying that the signal has to go through an analog phase,
>right?

It's on the disc as an analog signal, so yeah. It's the AC-3 RF to
AC-3 demodulator that makes the signal digital. Without the
demodulator, you've got nothing.

>So my LD player has digital coaxial audio out. I have used it to connect it to
>my sound card (M-Audio series) S/PDIF in. On LD itself it says Digital Audio.
>Was I doing the right thing? I think that I got it right and the digital sound
>sounded better than analog.

Yeah, that's right. It's not AC-3, but rather few discs have that,
anyway.
Anonymous
May 30, 2004 5:43:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
:>my sound card (M-Audio series) S/PDIF in. On LD itself it says Digital Audio.
:>Was I doing the right thing? I think that I got it right and the digital sound
:>sounded better than analog.

: Yeah, that's right. It's not AC-3, but rather few discs have that,
: anyway.

All of mine do. Actually I just noticed. Some of my LDs say Digital Audio. Some
others Digital Sound. What's the difference?

--Leonid
Anonymous
May 31, 2004 6:41:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote in message
news:c9coem$a5k$2@news3.bu.edu...
> : Yeah, that's right. It's not AC-3, but rather few discs have that,
> : anyway.
>
> All of mine do. Actually I just noticed. Some of my LDs say Digital
Audio. Some
> others Digital Sound. What's the difference?

AC-3 means Dolby Digital 5.1, which was introduced in 1995. Relatively
few laserdiscs have AC-3.

"Digital Audio" and "Digital Sound" are the same thing, a PCM digital
stereo/surround soundtrack. Almost all laserdiscs since the mid-80s have
this.
Anonymous
May 31, 2004 7:53:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Joshua Zyber" <jzyber@SPAMMERS-DROP-DEAD.mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:IXwuc.31554$zO3.25847@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> AC-3 means Dolby Digital 5.1, which was introduced in 1995. Relatively
> few laserdiscs have AC-3.

Actually doesn't AC-3 just mean DD? It could be anywhere from 1.0 to
3/3.1(DD EX)

> "Digital Audio" and "Digital Sound" are the same thing, a PCM digital
> stereo/surround soundtrack. Almost all laserdiscs since the mid-80s have
> this.
>
>
Anonymous
May 31, 2004 12:07:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

> It could be anywhere from 1.0 to
>3/3.1(DD EX)

Dolby Digital comes in Mono, Stereo and 5.1 surround flavors. A more
advanced Dolby Digital EX (EXtended surround)codec exists also, which can be up
to 7.1 channels, but is usually limited to 6.1.
This compares to Dolby Pro-Logic Stereo (2-Channels), Dolby Pro-Logic
Surround (4.1 Channels) and Dolby Pro-Logic II and IIx which can be up to 5.1
channels. I personally prefer DTS.
It's only to bad that Sony's 8-channel SDDS system has never been
incorporated into home-audio equipment. A top-spec ES line Sony reciever with
DD, DD EX, DTS, DTS-ES, DTS 96/24, NEO:6, Pro-Logic II/IIx and SDDS decoding
might be enough to make me re-think buying a Sony A/V reciever. Of course, we'd
need SDDS mixes on our DVDs or the decoding would be worthless.
Anonymous
May 31, 2004 7:06:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Biz" <biznospam@att.net> wrote in message
news:8%xuc.13191$_k3.305633@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > AC-3 means Dolby Digital 5.1, which was introduced in 1995.
Relatively
> > few laserdiscs have AC-3.
>
> Actually doesn't AC-3 just mean DD? It could be anywhere from 1.0 to
> 3/3.1(DD EX)

As it relates to laserdisc, Dolby Digital was only used for 5.1
encoding. There are no laserdiscs with DD 1.0 or 2.0 soundtracks. DVD is
the only format to use that.

DD-EX is technically still a 3/2.1 (aka 5.1) format, but with a matrixed
rear center channel. So is DTS-ES Matrix. The only true 3/3.1 (aka 6.1)
sound format is DTS-ES Discrete.
Anonymous
May 31, 2004 9:22:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Joshua Zyber <jzyber@SPAMMERS-DROP-DEAD.mindspring.com> wrote:
: "Digital Audio" and "Digital Sound" are the same thing, a PCM digital
: stereo/surround soundtrack. Almost all laserdiscs since the mid-80s have
: this.

Thanks. Good to know.

--Leonid
June 2, 2004 6:55:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@cs.bu.edu> wrote in message
news:c9ag2e$kpu$4@news3.bu.edu...
> Rick <deNOBULLlorean@dodo.com.au> wrote:
> : The long story short about grabbing the AC3 off of an LD is that you
HAVE TO
> : use the RF demodulator for your (digital) soundcard to understand the
>
> So basically you're saying that the signal has to go through an analog
phase,
> right?
>
> : the digital coaxial/optical cable. HOWEVER, this is NOT the same as the
PCM
> : soundtrack (ie the digital track on your LD disc that houses the
Pro-Logic
> : Surround soundtrack). Only a few LD players were ever fitted with a
digital
> : PCM line-out (the same thing as a digital-out on certain CD players) so
>
> So my LD player has digital coaxial audio out. I have used it to connect
it to
> my sound card (M-Audio series) S/PDIF in. On LD itself it says Digital
Audio.
> Was I doing the right thing? I think that I got it right and the digital
sound
> sounded better than analog.
>
> I did the video capture feeding sound just like I described above. I
captured
> the sound at 44.1kHz and as a post process resampled it to 48kHz for DVD.
>
> --Leonid

I may have missed a vital post here, but what model Laserdisc Player do you
own? It may help in us determining if you have certain features on it
instead of us having to explain everything in every little detail.
Anonymous
June 3, 2004 4:16:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Rick <deNOBULLlorean@dodo.com.au> wrote:
:> So my LD player has digital coaxial audio out. I have used it to connect
: it to
:> my sound card (M-Audio series) S/PDIF in. On LD itself it says Digital
: Audio.
:> Was I doing the right thing? I think that I got it right and the digital
: sound
:> sounded better than analog.
:>
:> I did the video capture feeding sound just like I described above. I
: captured
:> the sound at 44.1kHz and as a post process resampled it to 48kHz for DVD.
:>
:> --Leonid

: I may have missed a vital post here, but what model Laserdisc Player do you
: own? It may help in us determining if you have certain features on it
: instead of us having to explain everything in every little detail.

Hi Rick,

I use Pioneer Elite CLD52.

I have completed my project (see the thread called
"I finally x-ferred my first LD to DVD"). I think I did the right thing.
Sound turned out to be killer.

--Leonid
!