Billy Joe
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: hauppauge 150 vs 250/350 vs usb2 |
|
|
uriah wrote:
| Quote: | any one use these cards and can you compare or comment on
them?
|
With a USB2 and an H250 I've had no complaints in the last 2
years (agony, in the earliest days of WinXPHE tho not
specifically attributable to the OS).
Since normally my USB2 device captures from an HD-recorder,
whilst the H250 captures directly from cable, I was quite (and
pleasantly) surprised to find that I can plug the USB2 into the
tower containing the H250 and the USB2 will take precedence. No
adjustments necessary on my part at all. Remove it and the H250
resumes capture.
The majority of my captures are at the 12 mbps a/v rate and a
good deal of those (episodics) are converted to Xvid/MP3/AVI
(1.5 mbps) for archive. Except for those times when my cable is
performing poorly, these conversions are pristine.
I can't say that there is any difference in performance between
these devices (my H250 being over 3 years old and USB2 less than
2 years) and the USB2 software provided by Hauppauge works
flawlessly with the H250.
Some other advantages of these devices which may go un-noticed
are:
* command line operation (this allow me to utilize my own VB6
coding to invoke capture on schedule and utilize specific
settings - way better than the schedule software provided)
* file chunking (registry settings to cause the capture program
to slice the MPG file in to specific sizes - say 1 or 2 gig to
facilitate burning and playback in MPEGISO capable players, or
700 mB for those with only CD burners).
The only drawback to USB2 is the additional snakepit wiring and
power requirements. This is offset to a large degree by its
portability. And I'd opt for the USB over the H250/350 today,
precisely because of this portability.
BJ |
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in