BR-HD50U... A Great Deck + Wish List

[Mark Silva]

I just recieved a BR-HD50U on monday and wanted to share my experiences.

This deck performs very well so far.

I captured about 3 hours of DVCAM (large tape) and mini-dv footage through component analog and rs422 with no problems at all.
(thanks for the RS-422 setting Tim D! I set that first thing right out of the box)

There were many different branded tapes used and all came in with no drop outs or audio problems like my sony dv deck used to have from time to time.

I also played some HDV-30P material and tried out the downconversion modes and timecode window displays. Works Great and performs as expected.

So here's my user feedback/wishlist of things for JVC to ponder on future decks:

1. It would be nice if the power supply was internal and used a standard pc power chord plugged into the back. I'm not a fan of external bricks and most other decks this size don't have them.

2. Balanced XLR Audio outputs would be much appreciated.

3. I'd rather have an HD-SDI out with embedded audio and timecode on the rs-422 than have the deck be able to encode HDV personally.
Editing systems already do that, so why have an encoder on deck as well?
I guess some people might use it for HDV recording. I never render back to HDV so maybe its just me.


4. Let it at least playback 1080/60i so the sony and canon non-24 mode tapes can be captured if my client brings them in. HDV was supposed to
be a standard. How bout allowing at least one mode to be universal...hhmm?

5. Allow the LP mode tapes to keep playing. Its funny. On the Sony DV decks (no pro deck plays LP that I'm aware of) they just play garbage and distorted audio, but the BRHD50 will play the tape for a few seconds perfectly then just stop itself. If you keep hitting play it keeps playing a few seconds. Why not just let it keep going for those rare times somebody turns in an LP mode tape?
Just enable the playback with the caveat that its not guaranteed since LP mode is usually plagued with dropouts and other issues.



Thats all. :)

I love this deck and it really is quite versatile for my needs. It's rock solid reliable too, so if your on the fence about it, go right on and get one.

[Jiri Bakala]

Originally Posted by Mark Silva

I captured about 3 hours of DVCAM (large tape) and mini-dv footage through component analog and rs422 with no problems at all.
(thanks for the RS-422 setting Tim D! I set that first thing right out of the box)

Mark, what NLE are you using and what firmware version os your deck?

[Thomas Smet]

The one feature I would really like to see on a HDV deck is HD component or HD-SDI input. A great workflow for HDV editing would be to use a 3rd party hardware card that outputs a uncompressed or HDV project and just run it into a HDV deck and let the deck do the HDV encoding on the fly just like how a HDV camera encodes HDV on the fly. This would save people a lot of time by not having to encode their timeline first to a whole new HDV stream in order to run to tape. Even though computers are getting faster at encoding HDV it would still be better to let the deck do the encoding because that way you could have live from the timeline recording without having to wait at all.

It is going to be a few years yet before we can even think of having a NLE system with on the fly transcoding to a transport stream and send it through firewire live from the timeline.

[Mark Silva]

Originally Posted by Jiri Bakala

Mark, what NLE are you using and what firmware version os your deck?

FCP 5.04

I believe it has the latest firmware, as it was on backorder for a week before it was shipped.

[Dave Beaty]

My biggest wishlist item is Sync in Genlock. That way, I could record directly from the BR-HD50 to my BetaSP deck or when I digitize via Kona, I'd have locked sync.

As it is now, when downconverting and capturing 480i via Kona LHe, sometimes the Kona refuses to capture for at least 30 sec of spinning pin wheel before capture commences. I am almost positive this is a Genlock issue.

I know I can buy a component frame sync. But, again, that's more expensive than the Deck itself.

Dave Beaty

[Carl Hicks]

Originally Posted by Dave Beaty

My biggest wishlist item is Sync in Genlock. That way, I could record directly from the BR-HD50 to my BetaSP deck or when I digitize via Kona, I'd have locked sync.

As it is now, when downconverting and capturing 480i via Kona LHe, sometimes the Kona refuses to capture for at least 30 sec of spinning pin wheel before capture commences. I am almost positive this is a Genlock issue.

I know I can buy a component frame sync. But, again, that's more expensive than the Deck itself.

Dave Beaty

Exactly - So if we built-in a TBC/Frame sync, then the deck would be much more expensive. Customers who use firewire (the majority of users) for capture don't need this feature, so why make them pay thousands $ more for a feature that they don't need? The feature can be easily added outboard, as you pointed out.

Regards,

[Carl Hicks]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

The one feature I would really like to see on a HDV deck is HD component or HD-SDI input. A great workflow for HDV editing would be to use a 3rd party hardware card that outputs a uncompressed or HDV project and just run it into a HDV deck and let the deck do the HDV encoding on the fly just like how a HDV camera encodes HDV on the fly. This would save people a lot of time by not having to encode their timeline first to a whole new HDV stream in order to run to tape. Even though computers are getting faster at encoding HDV it would still be better to let the deck do the encoding because that way you could have live from the timeline recording without having to wait at all.

It is going to be a few years yet before we can even think of having a NLE system with on the fly transcoding to a transport stream and send it through firewire live from the timeline.

Hi Thomas,

In order for the deck to have HD component or HDSDI input, it would need to have a hardware-based MPEG encoder circuit. A good one is very expensive. This would probably triple the cost of the deck.

As an add-on solution, JVC is working on a stand-alone MPEG encoder/decoder box that will marry to the BR-HD50U via a firewire cable. This will essentially add component HD and HDSDI inputs to the deck, as well as HDSDI output, and many other powerful features. The tentative model # is SA-HD50U. Here is a link to the press release on this new product:

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/p...&feature_id=08


Regards,

[Werner Wesp]

with the upcoming HD200 and HD250, is there support vor 50p and 60p planned or is it necessary to buy another (upcoming) deck?

[Carl Hicks]

Originally Posted by Mark Silva

I just recieved a BR-HD50U on monday and wanted to share my experiences.

This deck performs very well so far.

I captured about 3 hours of DVCAM (large tape) and mini-dv footage through component analog and rs422 with no problems at all.
(thanks for the RS-422 setting Tim D! I set that first thing right out of the box)

There were many different branded tapes used and all came in with no drop outs or audio problems like my sony dv deck used to have from time to time.

I also played some HDV-30P material and tried out the downconversion modes and timecode window displays. Works Great and performs as expected.

So here's my user feedback/wishlist of things for JVC to ponder on future decks:

1. It would be nice if the power supply was internal and used a standard pc power chord plugged into the back. I'm not a fan of external bricks and most other decks this size don't have them.

2. Balanced XLR Audio outputs would be much appreciated.

3. I'd rather have an HD-SDI out with embedded audio and timecode on the rs-422 than have the deck be able to encode HDV personally.
Editing systems already do that, so why have an encoder on deck as well?
I guess some people might use it for HDV recording. I never render back to HDV so maybe its just me.


4. Let it at least playback 1080/60i so the sony and canon non-24 mode tapes can be captured if my client brings them in. HDV was supposed to
be a standard. How bout allowing at least one mode to be universal...hhmm?

5. Allow the LP mode tapes to keep playing. Its funny. On the Sony DV decks (no pro deck plays LP that I'm aware of) they just play garbage and distorted audio, but the BRHD50 will play the tape for a few seconds perfectly then just stop itself. If you keep hitting play it keeps playing a few seconds. Why not just let it keep going for those rare times somebody turns in an LP mode tape?
Just enable the playback with the caveat that its not guaranteed since LP mode is usually plagued with dropouts and other issues.



Thats all. :)

I love this deck and it really is quite versatile for my needs. It's rock solid reliable too, so if your on the fence about it, go right on and get one.

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the good report. I will make sure our product management team views your comments.

Some powerful features will be added to the BR-HD50U when you mate it up to our new SA-HD50U encoder/decoder. Here is a link to the press release for this product:

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/p...&feature_id=08

Regards,

[Carl Hicks]

Originally Posted by Werner Wesp

with the upcoming HD200 and HD250, is there support vor 50p and 60p planned or is it necessary to buy another (upcoming) deck?

The latest version of the BR-HD50U supports 50p and 60p. For older decks, it's a free download to update the deck. For BR-HD50U customers, the website is:

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/s...&itempath=null

I do not know the link for BR-HD50E updates, but you should be able to find out from JVC tech support in your country.

Regards,

[Mark Silva]

Originally Posted by Dave Beaty

My biggest wishlist item is Sync in Genlock. That way, I could record directly from the BR-HD50 to my BetaSP deck or when I digitize via Kona, I'd have locked sync.

I'm able to do both of those things right now.

You can record to Betacam no problem. It will be out of lock during recording but when you playback its fine.

Does your Kona not have internal synch? A lot of the uncompressed capture cards do now. Like I said above, I've been doing all kinds of capturing over analog component and it was in synch the whole time. I have the black magic design multibridge extreme.


I had no idea that Genlock was such an expensive endeavor for deck manufacterers. I can live without it truth be told, thats why I didn't mention it in my review.

The BR-HD50 is a GREAT deal for the cost and versatality though.

Thanks for your comments Carl.

[Thomas Smet]

Originally Posted by Carl Hicks

Hi Thomas,

In order for the deck to have HD component or HDSDI input, it would need to have a hardware-based MPEG encoder circuit. A good one is very expensive. This would probably triple the cost of the deck.

As an add-on solution, JVC is working on a stand-alone MPEG encoder/decoder box that will marry to the BR-HD50U via a firewire cable. This will essentially add component HD and HDSDI inputs to the deck, as well as HDSDI output, and many other powerful features. The tentative model # is SA-HD50U. Here is a link to the press release on this new product:

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/p...&feature_id=08


Regards,

But HDV cameras have a realtime hardware mpeg-2 encoder and they do not need to cost that much. I mean we now have $1300 HDV cameras and I wouldn't think the encoder would cost any more than half that price. I would think the price would be much less. Why is it that a hardware encoder chip costs so little for a HDV camera but yet it costs so much for a deck?

What about the encoder chip in the HD-200 camera? This is a true HD 60p encoder chip. Considering the cost of the HD200 along with every other component that make up the camera I would think the encoder chip cannot cost all that much. If the HD200 is around $8,000.00 and you take away the lens, DSP, CCD's, body, LCD screen, microphone and any other component not needed by a deck then I would think the encoder chip cannot be all that large of a chunk of the cost.

[Carl Hicks]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

But HDV cameras have a realtime hardware mpeg-2 encoder and they do not need to cost that much. I mean we now have $1300 HDV cameras and I wouldn't think the encoder would cost any more than half that price. I would think the price would be much less. Why is it that a hardware encoder chip costs so little for a HDV camera but yet it costs so much for a deck?

What about the encoder chip in the HD-200 camera? This is a true HD 60p encoder chip. Considering the cost of the HD200 along with every other component that make up the camera I would think the encoder chip cannot cost all that much. If the HD200 is around $8,000.00 and you take away the lens, DSP, CCD's, body, LCD screen, microphone and any other component not needed by a deck then I would think the encoder chip cannot be all that large of a chunk of the cost.

All MPEG encoder chips are not created equal. There are major quality advantages with the MPEG encoders that are built for pro products and therefore, higher costs. "You get what you pay for" applies here.

Plus, the economy of scale issue. Encoder chips for consumer camcoders are probably built in the millions, whereas encoders for pro cameras are built in the thousands.

[Thomas Smet]

Originally Posted by Carl Hicks

All MPEG encoder chips are not created equal. There are major quality advantages with the MPEG encoders that are built for pro products and therefore, higher costs. "You get what you pay for" applies here.

Plus, the economy of scale issue. Encoder chips for consumer camcoders are probably built in the millions, whereas encoders for pro cameras are built in the thousands.

But why not use the same exact encoder chip as in the HD-200. Wouldn't the price be better then since the same encoder chip is being used for multiple devices?

Also are you then saying that the encoder chip isn't good enough in the HD-200? The encoder chip in the HD-200 is clearly much cheaper since the entire camera costs around $8,000.00 and there are a lot more components that add to the cost of the HD-200 then just the encoder chip.

I think many of us would be over the moon happy even with a decent encoder chip in a HDV deck. If the encoder chip in a HD-100 or HD-200 is good enough to shoot with then it would be good enough for me to master with as well. Perhaps have a BR-HD500 which is the same deck as the BR-HD50 but with the HD-200 encoder chip in it for a few thousand more. I bet you it would sell very well because people would love to have the option of direct recording their HD projects back to HDV tape without having the long render process to deal with.

Even consumer grade encoder chips cannot be much worse then some of the cheap software encoders that are used in some NLE's.

[Laszlo Horvath]

I'm sorry if this question is off topic, but obviously all of you here are BR-HD50U users. Please let me know how reset the time code before recording on new tape. After every tape I need reset to zero. May my machine is broke, or i do something wrong, but the only way I can reset to zero is unplug, and replug the power cable. This is just crazy for me.

Thanks: Laszlo