Advice Needed: Return RetroTINK & Go Emulation?

[orange808]

It's a complicated issue. It's actually three things: video timing, frame lock, and transitions.

 

The Atari can output all kinds of unexpected timings and our new digital displays are designed to handle a nice predictable 59.94Hz-60Hz--with no changes in the signal once the display is synced up to a source. The Atari 2600 doesn't know or care about any of that.

 

Even if your display somehow recognizes the 256p and manages to output a proper "240p", you don't want any frame rate conversion, because that will create artifacts (like screen tearing and jitter). The term for outputting the exact input frame rate is "frame lock" and many displays and video processors use a frame buffer to convert frame rates. The result is always wrong. Frame rate conversion is a deadly sin--and doubly so with a "twitch" gaming system like the Atari. I need to know exactly where the missile chasing me in Yars Revenge is. Just one little glitch and I'm dead. That's never ever okay.

 

Also, everytime the signal timing changes too much, HDMI will have to go through the entire handshake process again. This creates annoying "drops" in signal right in the middle of a game!

 

So, we have trouble with:

1. Syncing to nonstandard signals.

2. "Locking" the frame rate.

3. Midgame "blank screens" when the signal changes and the display has to resync.

[Schizophretard]

I bought that RCA 480p projector from Walmart for $79. It might work well with your RetroTINK since it outputs 480p. You said you don't have room for another LCD or a CRT but if you have room for something smaller than your Atari VCS and a white wall, white sheet, or whatever then this may be a solution. I tested it with my wife's NES Classic and SNES classic. It exceeded my expectations and I'm impressed. I think I need to clarify by what I mean by impresssed. I am very pro-CRT and very anti-anything else. I mean, I wish flat panel TVs weren't even invented kind of anti. So, when I say impressed for something that isn't a CRT then it has a very strong meaning.

 

Anyway, the image looked so much like a CRT that I would have to look at them side by side to tell the difference. It had scanlines but also veritical lines forming "pixels" that look very similar to the phosphorus "pixels" on CRTs with even a glow and slight bleed to them. Another appearance it had was the look of depth like a CRT. It is kind of hard to explain but with an LCD I can see that the image is on the screen but with a CRT there is a depth that makes the image appear behind the glass. If I didn't know what I was looking at I would guess that it was a real NES and Super NES hooked up to a CRT with compontent cables.

 

I didn't even project it at its full 150". The 4:3 image was about the size that would be on a 55" or maybe 65" LCD and it looked like I had a huge late model Sony Trinitron in my wall. I'm so impressed that it will add life to my CRT collection because they won't need used as often. I think it is kind of cool that for most people it would seem like a very cheap projector that looks like crap at 480p while the image looks so spot on for retro gaming that it seems like a homebrew gadget one of us would create.

[Keatah]

Why are we still here, in 2018, still having the same problems & headaches with properly converting video signals?

 

Outside of our little group of vintage gamers, there's really no need to be able to do that sort of thing. No one has developed a solution that addresses all the nuances of frame rate differences or artifacted color (Apple II false color), It is definitely not for lack of technology. We have microprocessors that can do 20+ billions of operations per second. Chips as such are seriously overpowered for the task. So.. yeh..

 

 

Why do emulation images look so nice while original (modded) hardware does not?

 

There are several reasons. Emulation works wonders with dot-addressable displays, like your contemporary flatscreen. Emulation is entirely within the digital realm, no half-assed conversions or mods need be present. When your "Game Program" or the emulator itself want to paint a pixel at 120,74 with color 3b, for example, it will get done exactly and precisely that way. All the time, every time, across many monitors and computer combinations. Consistently and reliably. There is no analog ambiguity to consider. It's all in very precisely defined codes and numbers in a digital signal.

 

If you take a modded (or not) console that is STILL outputting an analog signal you must quickly digitize that signal accurately and convert it into something your HDMI display understands. The cost of a good A-D converter and supporting circuitry is still kinda high. People are expecting $5 and $10 mods. That ain't gonna cut it. And sort like I said before, few or no people have developed software to capture, analyze and rebuild the signal into the digital domain. Not with any accuracy that would please a speedrunner or twitcher.

 

While there is artistic interpretation and individual developer flair in circuit design, so to speak, there is no insurmountable problem with what you want.

 

It's a matter of spec the parts, write the software, assemble the circuit. And match it to the console you want to use it with.

 

 

But when using original modded hardware and/or video converters, it either looks crappy or doesnt work at all. Why?

 

Converters and mods are shit. Some or most video converters do not know how to handle the VCS output signal, modded or not. And when they do, they do so just enough to get by. They don't dissect the signal and re-assemble it digitally in sufficient detail fast enough. So now your TV has to try and guess, not that it is endowed with the brains to do so.

 

 

Is it only because more of the tech nerds over the decades have been focused & working on emulation then on real hardware?

 

Partly yes. Most classic game/computer emulation developed out of school projects, technical exercises, and the novelty of playing a then 10-year old game on a desktop. Playing Tempest or Galaxian was ultra-mega-cool and stuff. The idea grew into MAME more or less. Preservation entered the picture. And a quest for accuracy suddenly became important. And today both users and developers see emulation as a viable replacement for ailing hardware. And last but not least, emulation is a great testing and debugging tool. Well that's kinda how I see it, there's so much more to the storyline of early emulation.

 

 

In other words, are we still stuck here because we havent thrown enough time, money, or work into doing it right, or, is it truly because it just isnt possible to do?

 

Simply because no one has taken the time to cover all the details and nuances. As far as today's tech goes, there's more than what's needed for the task by.. about.. a billion times!

 

The need for such a converter isn't all that great in the scheme of things.

 

 

Are input lag, scaling issues, & signal problems literally unsolvable? Or will they all eventually be figured out and resolved?

 

They are eminently solvable. No question there. And with today's newer displays, you can have programmable refresh rates even. As far as lag goes - just give it enough processing power to do it realtime. Any microprocessor of the past 10 years is more than sufficient. Really.

 

Even my vintage GeForce 4 card in my vintage Pentium III rig has a TV encoder/decoder (Phillips) chip that handles the Apple II composite signal just fine. It outputs realtime to VGA, S-Video, or DVI. No mods required. There is also a small plug-in board that picks the digital signal from the Apple II mainboard and sends it to VGA. Minimal or no lag, realtime.

 

Signal problems? All you need is a A-D converter to dissect the vintage console's analog signal with precision and speed. Shouldn't be more than a coupla hunderd bucks for it and the associated circuitry. But 10$ mods!!

 

 

So why cant we fool a tv into thinking it is indeed receiving a true HDMI signal?

 

No need to fool anything. Just send it a genuine in-spec HDMI signal and be done with it.

 

What information goes into that HDMI datapath/signal is entirely up to your microntroller or microprocessor. In the case of emulation, the CPU builds the image it "wants" you to see and off it goes. 60 times a second. BTW. Modern micros run VCS emulation while in idle.

 

Im just at the point of frustration with all of this in the sense that I dont understand why its taken so long for someone, somewhere, to just figure it all out?

 

Frustrated, sure. But again there is no need. Or, rather, no need outside of vintage gaming circles which are incredibly small. Few and far between..

 

 

Wouldnt the pay off in finally having a 100% fully working & 100% fully compatible video converter / scaler, which would sell like hot cakes, be motivation enough for the tech nerds?

 

 

Maybe. Maybe not. You'd have to ask them directly. Didn't the Framemeister fill that role for a long time though?

 

At the same time I believe tech nerds are going to take the more elegant solution and use the existing PC infrastructure and go with emulation. Operate entirely within the digital domain. Tweaking and making changed to emulators is a cinch for both developers and end-users. Developers can change code and recompile. End users can play with sliders and commandlines. And all this operated on contemporary hardware and through contemporary standards, like HDMI.

 

IMHO emulation programs like Stella and Altirra and many others are going to be developed at a leisurely relaxing pace with no endgame. They are built with love and dedication and attention to the most minute of details. And some have been in development for 20+ years. I'm not sure a video converter would garner the same TLC and dedication to bring perfection.

 

 

And so the question is...Is it impossible, or, has it just not been done yet?

 

Just hasn't been done yet. No need, no motivation. No insurmountable technical issues. It is what it is.

 

---

 

I personally find it easier dragging a NUC or my Shuttle XPC to parties and meets for vintage gaming. Every house has some sort of HDMI-enabled monitor or television. And emulators just work naturally with such displays. Just like the analog output of a TIA works naturally with RF/Composite enabled CRT sets.

[Supergun]

A thousand thanks for that incredibly detailed analysys & explanation. While I didnt quite grasp & fully understand all of it, it gave me high hopes that better solutions are indeed possible & will eventually come to light. Your knowledge & understanding of the subject is incredible. And your last statement covered what is indeed my biggest hurdle; that is, dealing with other peoples set ups & equipment when I bring my games to their locations. As obviously, in my own home, I simply use my CRTs to play my games.

 

I will post another key discussion point later today, along the lines of what the person just above you touched upon. Thank you again and happy new year!

[WishItWas1984]

I bought that RCA 480p projector from Walmart for $79. It might work well with your RetroTINK since it outputs 480p. You said you don't have room for another LCD or a CRT but if you have room for something smaller than your Atari VCS and a white wall, white sheet, or whatever then this may be a solution. I tested it with my wife's NES Classic and SNES classic. It exceeded my expectations and I'm impressed. I think I need to clarify by what I mean by impresssed. I am very pro-CRT and very anti-anything else. I mean, I wish flat panel TVs weren't even invented kind of anti. So, when I say impressed for something that isn't a CRT then it has a very strong meaning.

 

We're definitely on other ends of the spectrum. LOL I appreciate and love a real CRT, but I love modern tech too. My gut tells me that if you gave those guys an LCD back in the day and crisp graphics, they'd fall over themselves for it, but that's just me.

 

I appreciate the suggestion and that indeed might work, but unfortunately I don't have a white wall, or a free wall, for that kind of setup. Lugging out a sheet....nah, just too much of a PITA. lol

[orange808]

Variable sync and emulation can take care of our issues.

 

An emulator can embed the output into a consistent signal and variable sync can overcome the need for frame rate conversion. Frame lock is automatic and always present--and the signal never needs to "resync".

 

An FPGA console with variable sync would be great. Someday soon, that will happen and 99.99% accuracy without hacks is possible---once we get an affordable and powerful FPGA to handle the job.

[Schizophretard]

We're definitely on other ends of the spectrum. LOL I appreciate and love a real CRT, but I love modern tech too. My gut tells me that if you gave those guys an LCD back in the day and crisp graphics, they'd fall over themselves for it, but that's just me.

 

I appreciate the suggestion and that indeed might work, but unfortunately I don't have a white wall, or a free wall, for that kind of setup. Lugging out a sheet....nah, just too much of a PITA. lol

My suggestion is modern tech. A projector screen being a PITA has solutions too.

[+-^CrossBow^-]

It's a complicated issue. It's actually three things: video timing, frame lock, and transitions.

 

The Atari can output all kinds of unexpected timings and our new digital displays are designed to handle a nice predictable 59.94Hz-60Hz--with no changes in the signal once the display is synced up to a source. The Atari 2600 doesn't know or care about any of that.

 

Even if your display somehow recognizes the 256p and manages to output a proper "240p", you don't want any frame rate conversion, because that will create artifacts (like screen tearing and jitter). The term for outputting the exact input frame rate is "frame lock" and many displays and video processors use a frame buffer to convert frame rates. The result is always wrong. Frame rate conversion is a deadly sin--and doubly so with a "twitch" gaming system like the Atari. I need to know exactly where the missile chasing me in Yars Revenge is. Just one little glitch and I'm dead. That's never ever okay.

 

Also, everytime the signal timing changes too much, HDMI will have to go through the entire handshake process again. This creates annoying "drops" in signal right in the middle of a game!

 

So, we have trouble with:

1. Syncing to nonstandard signals.

2. "Locking" the frame rate.

3. Midgame "blank screens" when the signal changes and the display has to resync.

 

I have been told that Empire Strikes Back seems to cause occasional screen blanking issues through a Tink from an s-video modded 7800. But only when you destroy a walker and it isn't all the time? Can anyone confirm if the Tink has issues with this game? I do not own a retrotink myself and my Extron that I use doesn't seem to have any issues with any games I've played through it. But I did notice that when playing the game on my stock 7800 through RF, that the entire screen will shift up and then back down everytime a walked is destroyed. That is with the RF connected directly to my TV's Ant coax input. So I suspect something with the scanlines is going goofy in that game when a walker is blown up and the flashing begins?

 

Anyone else have a way to test this or no from a programming side of things if ESB does something weird to the scanlines?

[blainelocklair]

... and, here's a video of it happening on my s-video modded 7800 through the TINK. Doesn't bounce when the AT-ATs are destroyed like it does through RF. Only blacks out some of the time. TV is a Toshiba 43" 4K Fire TV Edition, purchased a couple of weeks ago. Didn't have ESB when I had the older flat panel in place.

 

Side note: the Intellivision version doesn't exhibit this problem, likely due to its programming.

ESBAnomaly.m4v.zip

[+-^CrossBow^-]

... and, here's a video of it happening on my s-video modded 7800 through the TINK. Doesn't bounce when the AT-ATs are destroyed like it does through RF. Only blacks out some of the time. TV is a Toshiba 43" 4K Fire TV Edition, purchased a couple of weeks ago. Didn't have ESB when I had the older flat panel in place.

 

Side note: the Intellivision version doesn't exhibit this problem, likely due to its programming.

Blaine you might try Moon Patrol if you have it. I believe it is listed in this thread as possibly causing issues with the Tink as well due to the title screen not meeting strict scanlines. Be curious if you see something similar on your Tink?

[envytomdead2]

This kind of the reason why I have been holding off on the tink until I get a new tv. I was worried that because it sends out a non standard signal some tvs might not like it. I do have a retron 77 that works well for my 2600 library but that doesn't help me with my 7800. I do have a decent A/V to hdmi converter that allows me to choose aspect ratio with minimal to no noticeable lag. I mainly use this for my Genesis but I have used it for my 7800 through an old vcr. My crt is dying and my vizio is kind of old. I can't see spending over $100 on something that might not work.

[+-^CrossBow^-]

I use an old Extron AV swticher in my setup in conjunction with my OSSC and haven't seen anything like the issues described. But I also know my extron switcher has its own scaler tech inside it and likely 'corrects' these odd video signal issues in my setup. I kinda wish I had known about the Retrotink when I bought my OSSC. I might still pick one up for testing purposes but not sure it would ever have a permanent place in my AV setup.

[blainelocklair]

Blaine you might try Moon Patrol if you have it. I believe it is listed in this thread as possibly causing issues with the Tink as well due to the title screen not meeting strict scanlines. Be curious if you see something similar on your Tink?

 

 

Why, yes I do! CIB, in fact, and never even pulled out of the box to test. I will fire it up tonight through the TINK and post results.

[blainelocklair]

... and, no picture. At all. Not even by pressing reset, a controller button. Nothing. (See attached pic)

 

Quick reminder: using RetroTINK 2x with Toshiba 43" 4K HDR Fire TV Edition. YMMV.

 

Also had a CIB Vanguard and a CIB Freeway I hadn't loaded up yet. Quick isopro cleaning of the contacts, stuck 'em in there. They both work beautifully.

 

So, the original topic title was asking for suggestions about whether to use the TINK or just go emulation. I really like the TINK. It has one responsibility and one responsibility only (albeit a long sentence):

 

Ultra-low latency line doubler to convert component, S-video and composite video sources (plus audio) to HDMI at 480p.

 

So far, the only two games I tried from Atari 2600, Atari 7800, Intellivision, ColecoVision, SNES, Sega Genesis, Panasonic 3DO FZ-10, N64, and Dreamcast that haven't worked 100% are ESB and Moon Patrol. Everything else I've thrown at it has worked wonderfully well. The 7800 and Genesis are s-video modded, the Inty and CV are composite modded, and the 3DO, N64 and Dreamcast are connected by s-video. It has taken them all in by a powered switcher (a JVC S-777, outputs all inputs as s-video to the TINK) and the TINK has handled them admirably. Looks like there will be an occasional 2600 game just a bit out of sync here and there, which can be solved by connecting right to the TV in those cases. For the $100, I still value it a lot. In fact, the small number of game incompatibilities or glitches that will happen is not my real beef with it. My only real gripe is having to press the input select button once on it to go to s-video every time I turn it on because it doesn't save the last known setting. Other than that, it's been great. If only that one setting could be field updated (it can't), it would be amazing.

 

So, would I buy it again? Absolutely. Cheap, reliable, and does exactly what it advertises. I wish more products could say the same.

 

Hope all of this helps!

 

- Blaine

P.S.: If you want to see the output of the TINK and Atari 2600/7800 to it by s-video, hit me up by PM and I'll take and send you some photos. -^Cro§Bow^- does an amazing job of modding them to produce a stunning picture.

[+-^CrossBow^-]

So 2600 moon patrol never produces a picture for you at all? Again I don't have any of these issues, but then everything I put into the OSSC is already being upscaled and video corrected by my Extron which, btw I can set the output from that at a Locked rate and that could also be a reason why I don't see these issues in my AV setup. I also don't recall these issues happening with my previous setup using a JVC powered switcher S-700 and then through my cheapy composite/s-video to HDMI converter.

 

Blaine the next test on this is to try and use the tink on a different TV (Your old Proscan) if you are able, to see if you get different results through the Tink for those games.

[+RichG1972]

To me, the VCS is designed to work with a CRT. It's inherent. It's intertwined. Using mods and converters to make it work with an LCD always seems to result in a less than ideal experience.

 

I'm a big proponent of emulation. Way past the point of obsession some would say. And I feel that with today's tech and refinement, emulation is a viable replacement for most classic consoles. While not exactly 100% to the purists, all the extra niceties and conveniences emulation brings to the table is huge plus. Not to mention reliability which is outstanding.

 

You can always pack away the VCS for the future and wait till a proper mod that works in the digital domain is created.

I myself have 2 13 inch CRT's and a 19 inch, so I have the ideal TV's to use with the VCS, and mine is all stock just as it was when Dad first bought it in 1981. Proud to say it still works flawlessly ^_^

[envytomdead2]

I myself have 2 13 inch CRT's and a 19 inch, so I have the ideal TV's to use with the VCS, and mine is all stock just as it was when Dad first bought it in 1981. Proud to say it still works flawlessly ^_^

This thread actually inspired me to get my CRT fixed and then by chance my mom decided she wanted a flat screen and gave me hers. These things are built to last! I still like to play my Genesis on my flat screen with my upscaler and play atari via my retron 77. I think if I were to get something it would be a retron 5 because I like using the retron 77 save states.

[+TwentySixHundred]

I sold my 2600 about 10 years ago when i found myself mainly using Stella and doing a house clean out. Got tired of lugging around the old CRT and was moving house at the time. As much as i regret selling the 2600 and kick myself for selling it, Stella has filled the void. (truly a great emulator)

 

I find emulation suites my lifestyle more these days as i run them on a desktop PC connected to the family room TV. No room for a man cave anymore and find the setup ideal, neat and tidy without cables and consoles on the floor ect.

 

I have also been very pro emulation and preservation for the past couple of decades when it comes to old school gaming. These days there is very accurate emulators for just about every system from the 2600 to the PS1, provided you have a half decent rig for some. Also great filters, tools and aspect correction ect that really helps the experience on modern displays. I know there is still some input lag however i hardy notice any and doesn't effect my experience.

 

Nothing beats the real deal but emulation is my preferred choice these days. That's enough from me im starting to sound like a used car salesman.

[marlowe221]

Ill keep using my Vader model 2600 as long as it works and I can find CRTs to use it with. Ive never tried hooking it up to a modern flatscreen so I dont know how that would work.

 

But the day it craps out on me, or the day I cant find another CRT more likely, Ill be building a Raspberry Pii or similar with a 2600 case.

 

I think the main challenge will be finding a decent and semi-authentic feeling controller for Atari stuff. But the idea of an all-in-one Atari machine that encompasses everything from the 2600 to the ST is very appealing.

Edited March 16, 2019 by marlowe221