Please Recommend Product to Cap HD Feed.

[supercooled]

Hey guys, I recently bought into IPTV here in Canada (FibeTV) and have been looking around for a cheap solution to capture the feed on my Mac. I mainly record hockey games to watch later but the PVR only has an infinite amount of space. Anyway, one such product is the Elgato EyeTV HD which seems to do what I want but isn't there a cheaper solution like a second video card with compliant ports to the PVR receiver and software to do that for cheaper than $200? I'm a little disappointed the Elgato unit doesn't even have HDMI instead of all those component wires.

Would like to hear some thoughts from the AV crowd here at MR. Thanks

 

[warvanov]

I mainly record hockey games to watch later but the PVR only has an infinite amount of space.

I would think an infinite amount of space would be plenty?

 

[peterjcat]

Anyway, one such product is the Elgato EyeTV HD which seems to do what I want but isn't there a cheaper solution like a second video card with compliant ports to the PVR receiver and software to do that for cheaper than $200? I'm a little disappointed the Elgato unit doesn't even have HDMI instead of all those component wires.

Most PC capture cards/units don't have HDMI inputs because they are required to respect copy protection -- so that the few that do have HDMI in probably won't be able to record your hockey matches. However, broadcast television generally tops out at 1080i which is well within the capability of a component video connection.

I have used the EyeTV HD but didn't find the picture quality quite good enough for archiving purposes. On the other hand it is very slick and easy to use. From what I have seen the Hauppauge HD PVR is better in the picture (and audio) quality department but the software might not be as Mac-like. If you don't need HD then one of the other Elgato units might do, but I don't have any experience with them.

 

[supercooled]

Most PC capture cards/units don't have HDMI inputs because they are required to respect copy protection -- so that the few that do have HDMI in probably won't be able to record your hockey matches. However, broadcast television generally tops out at 1080i which is well within the capability of a component video connection.

I have used the EyeTV HD but didn't find the picture quality quite good enough for archiving purposes. On the other hand it is very slick and easy to use. From what I have seen the Hauppauge HD PVR is better in the picture (and audio) quality department but the software might not be as Mac-like. If you don't need HD then one of the other Elgato units might do, but I don't have any experience with them.

Thanks for your input. The feed from the providers isn't all that much better but let me tell you after so many years of watching streams that are what, 320x480 on the internet the 1080i is welcomed. It's strange that sometimes I'll grab it off newsgroup and it's 1080p or at least advertised as such but my provider says no one is providing 1080p only 1080i.

I guess the second graphics card route is a non starter so I'll have to look into the Elgato EyeTv HD then.

Thanks for your input again.

 

[nateo200]

Sorry to thread jack but...

The Hauppauge HD PVR looks awesome! But it seams as though they really could care less about Mac OS X dumb product idea given the sheer notion of video editing and someone instantly pictures glowing apples and bad ass silver Mac Pro workstations...From what I gathered you have to pay for third party software...I just want to know if this is realistic to rely on third party software. Video/TV capture has been a nightmare for me...if I can get some cheapo card working its usually terrible quality and craps out sooner than later. 1080i is fine for me...you can always deinterlace or just use 720p. It seams to have a SPDIF connector which sounds nice, does it encode dolby pro logic at least? I'd kill for 6 channel discrete but I don't think SPDIF has the right protocols for that.

It's strange that sometimes I'll grab it off newsgroup and it's 1080p or at least advertised as such but my provider says no one is providing 1080p only 1080i.

No one is broadcasting 1080p over terrestrial satelite or cable services except for very limited channels usually for movies on demand. TV providers really beat the bit rate to hell to get it to fit down the "tube" enough and if they went to 1080p they would either have to make more bandwidth (so launching more sate lights, giving everyone new boxes, etc.) or compress 1080p to the already terribly low rates for 720p. Believe me, compressing 1080p is really nasty no matter what. Unless everyone magically grows fiberoptic backhaul I really don't see an advantage to 1080p over cable/dish. I'm content with my TV's 720p/1080i....in fact I usually watch 720p over 1080i if I'm watching dish. I do think, however, that they should broadcast 1080p for special events like the Superbowl, presidential addresses, etc. I have a lossless copy of the last Super Bowl in 720p....first time I ever bitched and moaned about resolution being to low!

 

[peterjcat]

Optical is fine for discrete Dolby Digital or DTS 5.1, which the Hauppauge should capture if it's in the source. Yes, it's a shame it can't integrate with the Mac as well as the EyeTV does.

1080p24 needs less bandwidth than 1080i60 so there's no capacity issue with the broadcast of movies, TV shows etc in their original progressive format. 1080p60 will be a challenge but not much is shot that way yet.

 

[nateo200]

Optical is fine for discrete Dolby Digital or DTS 5.1, which the Hauppauge should capture if it's in the source. Yes, it's a shame it can't integrate with the Mac as well as the EyeTV does.
If optical can't handle more than 2 channels than how is it going to fit 5.1 channels? Pro Logic is 5.1 matrixes into 2 channels then sent to the receiver to be appropriately decoded...however it is still 2 channels. How does the Hauppauge fair with that? I tested some of the demo software and I only see minimal options for audio channels but nothing about more than 2 channels....

1080p24 needs less bandwidth than 1080i60 so there's no capacity issue with the broadcast of movies, TV shows etc in their original progressive format. 1080p60 will be a challenge but not much is shot that way yet.
Still...I feel like compression artifacts would be rampant if they used the outdated MPEG2 stream....for 1080p60 they have decided that when it rolls out it will have to use H.264 for size and quality reasons (dumbed down: 1GB MPEG2 = 512MB's H.264)

I still want to see interlaced stuff burn faster...the first time I handled interlaced HDV video (after starting with a DSLR, which shoots all progressive scan) It looked like crap. Is there a reason other than $$$$$$$$$ and transition burden for using interlaced? I know sports benefit from faster frame rates but the field rates of interlaced look nasty as ever.