AVerTV USB HD DVR- Finally Competition for the HD-PVR

[Fuzzy]

It's not REALLY a new feature. There were some SD MPEG2 cards that could also playback MPEG2. Actually was probably the best SD TV Video output you could get on a PC back then. Sage even worked with it by being able to draw the UI overtop the video. Now days, though, I don't see the point. An ideal system wouldn't even have the recording and playing back being done in teh same room.

[Clift]

Getting away from SageTV, when you look at Newegg or Amazon there are always a ton of complaints on the HD PVR that playback of the recorded shows is "choppy" or "Stuttery." So the ability to playback the recorded content is actually a great feature. Thinking outside the PVR/DVR realm, most people who would use this for archiving (Xbox 360, PS3, occasional scheduled recordings, etc), then the lack of 5.1 is definitely a drawback but much less of a dealbreaker for most.

[SHS]

Originally Posted by HelenWeathers

That's why I am confused. Why WOULD you choose to do that?

Maybe becuases not all PC/Laptop/Netbook have really good graphic card in doing decoding of H264 Video or doen'st have HDMI out.
The graphic card I ref to which is the must common one found in laptop/netboot are from Intel.
So as Clift said

complaints on the HD PVR that playback of the recorded shows is "choppy" or "Stuttery." So the ability to playback the recorded content is actually a great feature.

Fuzzy talk about the old Hauppauge PVR 350

[Brent]

I had an interview with the folks at AverMedia about this new device. It looks pretty interesting really. The only real negative is the lack of 5.1 audio, but I expect pricing to get much more competitive between Hauppauge and AverMedia going forward - a good thing of course.

Details from my interview about the AverMedia USB HD DVR is at GeekTonic if interested.

I hope to have a review before or at the release date which is now April 2010.

[mr_lore]

Good news, but I really wish both of these guys would internalize these products on a PCI express x card to eliminate clutter and possibly the USB bandwidth issue, just sayin..

[Brent]

Originally Posted by mr_lore

and possibly the USB bandwidth issue..

What bandwidth issue? USB had more than enough to handle h.264 video. Clutter I can understand I guess.

[reggie14]

Yeah, I don't think USB 2.0 has a bandwidth problem with the HD-PVR. There might be a USB controller compatibility issue with the HD-PVR, and such issues might be more common with USB than PCI-e. But, I don't think it's clear what is causing HD-PVR instability. USB controller problems might be some of it, but it could easily be a very small contributing factor.

And I don't really get the clutter argument. You'll need an STB, component cables, and audio cables anyway. I don't think an internal card helps that much.

[mr_lore]

Agreed on bandwidth, 480mbs/=~12mbs per stream, but you guys get what I was on about there is some definite USB voodoo going on when you can move a HDPVR from one port to another, change nothing else and poof! stability goes from 30% to 99% (my experience).

My components are in a rack and internalizing these things would save me an entire shelf,cable mess, and just overall look nicer.

[MattHelm]

Originally Posted by Brent

If anyone has specific questions about the new AverMedia USB device either post them here, DM me or e-mail me with those questions by Monday. I have an interview set up with an AverMedia rep and hope to get more details on it

Thanks for that interview. BTW, did you get any feel at all if they think they have the stability problem the HD-PVR seems to have, licked?

[Brent]

Originally Posted by MattHelm

Thanks for that interview. BTW, did you get any feel at all if they think they have the stability problem the HD-PVR seems to have, licked?

Really difficult to say without actually testing it.

[MattHelm]

So, any news on if/when this is going to be released. It's the end of March!

[SWKerr]

I am seeing this out in the wild now, AVerTV USB HD DVR.

$145 at Buy.com ofter rebates and discounts.
http://www.buy.com/prod/avermedia-av...215516140.html

Any word on SageTV support?

[Tiki]

Originally Posted by SWKerr

I am seeing this out in the wild now, AVerTV USB HD DVR.

$145 at Buy.com ofter rebates and discounts.
http://www.buy.com/prod/avermedia-av...215516140.html

Any word on SageTV support?

Anyone tried this yet?

[Savage1701]

Interesting - found the page on the Aver site, but the instruction/installation manual tab is not active yet.

I am mostly curious at what rate it digitizes at. Depending on what you read, the HD-PVR either maxes at 12 or 13.5 megabits per second. That's barely enough, in my opinion, considering OTA ATSC is around 20, the newest HD camcorders go up to almost 30, and most blu-rays average in the high 20's to low 30's, and can spike much higher, if my Sony player's info display is reliable. My STB happens to do 480i or 1080i, so I lock it to 1080i to minimize problems with my HD-PVR.

Even at its best I think the HD-PVR is just adequate for HD. Most programs border on being a little soft and lacking in depth. It would be great if this item could even digitize in the upper teens. I think that alone would make a huge difference, but I can't really tell from what I see on the website.

Anyone hear any further info that tells what bitrate this unit can digitize at?

[Clift]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

Interesting - found the page on the Aver site, but the instruction/installation manual tab is not active yet.

I am mostly curious at what rate it digitizes at. Depending on what you read, the HD-PVR either maxes at 12 or 13.5 megabits per second. That's barely enough, in my opinion, considering OTA ATSC is around 20, the newest HD camcorders go up to almost 30, and most blu-rays average in the high 20's to low 30's, and can spike much higher, if my Sony player's info display is reliable. My STB happens to do 480i or 1080i, so I lock it to 1080i to minimize problems with my HD-PVR.

Even at its best I think the HD-PVR is just adequate for HD. Most programs border on being a little soft and lacking in depth. It would be great if this item could even digitize in the upper teens. I think that alone would make a huge difference, but I can't really tell from what I see on the website.

Anyone hear any further info that tells what bitrate this unit can digitize at?

There are a few things to consider, though...

OTA ATSC is around 20

OTA ATSC, although regarded as the best quality you're going to get from network broadcast is broadcasting in MPEG-2 versus MPEG4, part 10 or H.264. H.264 is more efficient than MPEG-2, so it's not an Apples to Apples consideration.

the newest HD camcorders go up to almost 30, and most blu-rays average in the high 20's to low 30's, and can spike much higher

You need to realize that Blu-ray is 1080p, whereas the HD-PVR is 1080i. Again, not apples to apples. Generally you would expect 1080i to be roughly half the bitrate of 1080p. Also, Blu-ray uses really high bitrates for another reason: To ensure no encoding artifacts. The other thing to consider is source material. Assuming you are using the HD PVR to record Cable or Satellite you have to realize that even the ATSC stream is going to be further compressed in order to maximize the number of HD channels the MVPD can fit in the limited amount of bandwidth available. Refer to this post on AVS Forums:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1008271

So, assuming a 12 Mbps bitrate for an MPEG-2 stream, 12 Mbps for an H.264 is plenty. If anything, the HD PVR is not efficient enough, if there is such a thing.

FiOS is a different beast, but so far there are a number of people on this board who use FiOS and there have been no complaints.

The last thing I would like to point out is the difference between decoders. Since OTA or QAM are MPEG-2, if we capture that stream using an ATSC or ClearQAM tuner, then an MPEG-2 codec is used to decode the stream, whereas an H.264/AVC codec is used to decode the HD PVR stream. Again, not apples to apples.

[paulbeers]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

I am mostly curious at what rate it digitizes at. Depending on what you read, the HD-PVR either maxes at 12 or 13.5 megabits per second. That's barely enough, in my opinion, considering OTA ATSC is around 20, the newest HD camcorders go up to almost 30, and most blu-rays average in the high 20's to low 30's, and can spike much higher,
Anyone hear any further info that tells what bitrate this unit can digitize at?

I am really tired of these ignorant posts. Seriously, isn't this like the 10th time someone has posted this about the HDPVR and it has had to be explained the differences. As stated, the HDPVR only records in upto 1080i. At 13.5mbps, this would be equilavelent to a 27mbps h.264 1080P recording. The top of the line Canon Consumer Grade Camcorder (I am comparing consumer grade as that is what the HDPVR is as well consumer grade) Vixia HFS21, can only record at 24mbps at 1080P and the MSRP on that is $1400! Further, to compare MPEG2 to H.264 is like comparing a juiciness of an Apple vs an Orange. So people STOP COMPARING!

Any loss in softness, has more to do with your software decoders and/or the digital to analog back to digital conversion than it does with the actual encoder. I am extremely pleased with the quality of video capture my HDPVR does when played back on my HD200 (hardware decoder0.

Please stop making these comparisons to bit-rates as all they keep doing is causing others to believe there is a difference which in turn causes more of these posts to pop up.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

Even at its best I think the HD-PVR is just adequate for HD. Most programs border on being a little soft and lacking in depth. It would be great if this item could even digitize in the upper teens. I think that alone would make a huge difference, but I can't really tell from what I see on the website.

I disagree. Between my R5000 and my HD PVR, the only way to reliably tell which recorded a show (off Dish) is to look at the recording details. There is no obvious, consistent difference in quality between the two. Even at ~96" of 1080p.

And my R5000 recordings are significantly smaller than my HD PVR ones.

Originally Posted by Clift

You need to realize that Blu-ray is 1080p, whereas the HD-PVR is 1080i. Again, not apples to apples. Generally you would expect 1080i to be roughly half the bitrate of 1080p.

Not exactly, most BD is 1080p24, actually fewer frames than 1080i60 (BD does not support 1080p60), so you wouldn't really expect the bitrate to be higher.

Also, Blu-ray uses really high bitrates for another reason: To ensure no encoding artifacts.

This is one reason, but there's another, much bigger reason the bitrates on BD are so high:

Because they can be.

Most movies these days are on BD-50's, so the only limits on bitrate are that it fit inside 50GB and under the max bitrate (40Mbps for video, 48Mbps for the whole mux IIRC). That's pretty easy. The encoding houses just leave the bitrate extra high so there's less work to do tuning the encoding. Make no mistake, you could get the same quality as BD in much less space if needed (HD DVD was the same quality in 40% less space), but to do that takes more work, tuning the encode.

High bitrates on BD are higher than necessary to save work/money on the encode.

[Savage1701]

Paul, I'm really sorry if my "ignorant" posts offend you. Let's review a few things though - I have Blu-Ray movies that use MPEG2 codecs, AVC, VC-1 etc. They all show high bit rates, I know, because they can and because it prevents tiling, adds apparent depth, stops mosquito noise, houndtoothing, low-light scene smearing, you name it.

So, in point of fact, my Blu Ray does use variants of H.264 to compensate for film or video source at different frame rates. Therefore, it's not totally incorrect to compare the HD-PVR to a blu-ray or camcorder, especially when the guts of the HD-PVR are supposedly a modded camcorder engine. And only relatively recently have H.264 camcorders been able to do 1920x1080p. They've glossed over it with 1440i or 1080i in the past. Or reviewers have caught them completely butchering their supposed 24p prowess. Probably never have 2 letters - "HD" - been so deceptively used in video history.

And not all Blu-Rays always did true 1080p output to begin with:

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/tes...ay-disc-player

This player took 1080p off the disc, converted it to 1080i and then back to 1080p if the TV at that time could take it. So what was its true bit rate? And what sort of digital butchering was unleashed on the source material?

H.264 encompasses all sorts of variants. There are websites where enthusiasts have complex H.264 clips that require special settings and filters and use of graphedit and you name it and they are darn proud that they have a codec that can play back those nasties.

Whatever the case may be, let me restate and try to do an apple to apple comparison -

It would sure be nice if the new AVER did do a higher bitrate than the HD-PVR, all other things being equal, and if it had more sophisticated encode/decode algorithms, hardware, A/D & D/A converters. And if it disclosed them. I can creat an H.264 1920x1080i file at such a low bitrate it will look awful, but by geometric standards it's still "hi def".

If higher bitrates with H.264 were irrelevant, than why not just have all consumer camcorders stop at around 12-13.5 Mb/s and 1080i for detail or 720p for motion oriented home videos? If H.264 is twice as efficient, then we've got 24-27 Mb/s MPEG2 quality. And yet, we don't. This unit can't beat an OTA ATSC ancient-codec MPEG2 signal. Panasonic is set to release a camcorder that goes up to 28 Mb/s on a non-MPEG2 compression variant. I doubt they are doing it solely because they can, and I doubt it would look as good as as 56 Mb/s MPEG2 if there even were such an animal outside of a lab.

I also understand some of you say you can't see the difference between your source material and what comes off your HD-PVR. To me, that becomes a consideration of the issue of the cable companies deliberately reducing their data rates on their HD channels. Despite the fact the insist they don't, it's not too hard to tell that they do in any sort of side-by-side comparison.

Finally, despite the fact the 99% of us in this forum use the HD-PVR for circumventing HDCP recording of HD cable, that's not the ONLY thing the HD-PVR is capable of recording, and component video can easily transmit 1080p, so it's not unrealistic AT ALL for me to wonder about the encoder on the AVER model or wish that my HD-PVR handled higher bitrates and/or 1080p and/or 24p, or that it would sure be nice if the AVER model did. If you think 13.5 Mb/s 1080i is the be-all end-all pinnacle of achievement for this sort of thing, that's your choice. If you love the quirks this unit exhibits to most users, good for you. But it's not mine, and it's not incorrect of me to want to know the real max bitrate and all other relevant specs that AVER captures at, which was the crux of my quesiton to begin with, not to mention better drivers, lockup issues, you name it.

So, do you know anything more about the AVER unit - and I will really try to stretch my intellect, hide my ignorance, and widen my question here - bitrate, codecs, hardware, ability to deal with 24p, 60i or 60p, A/D and D/A converters and pereceptual codec quality, or not?

Please enlighten those of us who are ignorant about the AVER unit and all things bitrate related. And please remember that the HD-PVR is not JUST for STB recording. It can't be, because it's built on a camcorder engine.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

Finally, despite the fact the 99% of us in this forum use the HD-PVR for circumventing HDCP recording of HD cable, that's not the ONLY thing the HD-PVR is capable of recording, and component video can easily transmit 1080p, so it's not unrealistic AT ALL for me to wonder about the encoder on the AVER model or wish that my HD-PVR handled higher bitrates and/or 1080p and/or 24p, or that it would sure be nice if the AVER model did. If you think 13.5 Mb/s 1080i is the be-all end-all pinnacle of achievement for this sort of thing, that's your choice.

The argument isn't whether 1.34Mbps is the "be-all end-all" or whether there are limitations to the HD PVR or not. The argument is that the limitations of the HD PVR aren't generally (in our experience) the limiting factor in the quality of the resulting recordings.

IMO your problems with the HD PVR are unfounded, purely theoretical in the context of using it as part of a PVR for recording TV.

If you love the quirks this unit exhibits to most users, good for you. But it's not mine, and it's not incorrect of me to want to know the real max bitrate and all other relevant specs that AVER captures at, which was the crux of my quesiton to begin with, not to mention better drivers, lockup issues, you name it.

Nobody was questioning your questions, just your unfounded issues with the HD PVR.

And please remember that the HD-PVR is not JUST for STB recording.

No it's not, but that's pretty much the only reason to discuss it on the SageTV forums, especially in the subforum devoted to SageTV's hardware support.

Not to be too crass, but if you're expecting a more general-video-capture dicussion, you're in the wrong forum, you'd be better off at AVS or one of the video capture forums if you're not very interested in recording of a Cable/Sat STB.

[dead_ferrets]

I'd love to know if/when Sage is going to support this...