| AVerMedia USB and Cardbus TV Tuners
|
Installation and Operation:
The CD-ROM for the USB version indicated an even older version of Adobe Acrobat was included (5.0 versus 5.1 on the cardbus tuner), so I just skipped installing anything from the disc. I downloaded a new set of drivers and application from the AVerMedia website and got on with the installation. As you would hope for, everything installed just fine, and within a minute I was ready to use the card.
The test installation was completed on a desktop computer with the following specifications:
» 2.6 GHz Intel Pentium 4 (C) processor
» 2048 MB (2x 1024 MB) PC3200 DDR memory
» 2x 80GB Seagate SATA-150 hard drives (one for software, one for capturing)
» DVD/CDRW combination drive
» Windows XP Pro (SP2)
With everything installed, the application was launched, and found to be the same as on the cardbus tuner. The image below shows the same base screen configuration, but this time I have opened the numerical keypad on the right for easy on screen channel changing.
The settings tabs were all quite similar as well, but a few things are worth noting. The below left screen shot shows the "Time Shift" tab which features far fewer options than the cardbus tuner. I un-installed and re-installed a couple times, checked a bunch of settings elsewhere, but I could not get more than the two basic options shown. Considering the specifications of this system are much stronger, and that this is actually a system I would want to be able to time shift, I was definitely a bit disappointed. Perhaps USB 2.0 can't handle higehr rates? The below right image shows the "Record Storage" tab which is necessary in a multi-drive system to allow you to select the best drive to record to.
 
Below we have the "Record" and "Channel" tabs which are just as we saw in the cardbus application, and provide all of the options you would expect to see.
 
Below we have a couple snapshots taken with the AVerTV software. Enlarging the images provides the full size, 1MB BMP files that the application produced. I have to say that the image quality of the stills and the live TV wasn't as good on the USB tuner as it was on the cardbus tuner. Despite being connected to the same cable outlet, and with roughly the same software settings, the cardbus tuner comes out on top in terms of basic TV watching performance.
 
I have to say I was surprised by the USB tuner's image quality, especially since I figured the 'stronger' computer specifications might help. Fiddling with the image settings did help, but sitting the test systems side-by-side made it clear that the cardbus tuner's image looked better. Faced with this fact, and that the time shifting settings were weaker on the USB tuner, I wasn't enthused as I moved into the next phase of testing.
Time shifting with the UltraTV USB 300 definitely doesn't take full advantage of the system's resources, and must be limited by the USB 2.0 interface, or something else in the design of the tuner. It is fully capable of time shifting in the two modes provided, but both are quite weak and you have to give up some quality when going from normal viewing to time shifting mode. If this is a feature you would use on a regular basis, you may be quite disappointed.
Recording on the USB tuner definitely provides results better than the cardbus tuner, but this is obviously system specification driven. Having a second hard drive has to be the key, and allows for the recordings to be made at a higher bit rate and with better overall quality. The downside is that the images on the screen during playback don't look great, and they obviously won't get any better once recorded. Additionally, when recordings from the UltraTV USB 300 are compared to comparable recordings from the Transcend TV-Box it is clear that if the Transcend unit was actually still on the market it would be a better choice.
My overall experience with the AVerMedia USB tuner wasn't as good as I had hoped it would be after enjoying performance from the cardbus tuner that definitely exceeded my expectations. Everything worked, but the reduced image quality, restricted time shifting settings, and lower quality recordings didn't "wow" me during any phase of testing.
|
|
|
|
