Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jolo]

 ::)Please excuse my stupidity, for I used to know the answer to this, but I will be asking this again.  ?

• I like to use the latest or my favored version of codecs that have not been added in as a plug-ins.
• Is there a a way way I can make a plug in out of them, or point to the external location of the codec

Thanks very much,


Jon

[Alex B]

Which codecs & versions?

[jolo]

Here are some of the codecs that I like to use:

[li]Ogg 2.83-aoTuVb4.51P3 [/li]
[li]Monkeys Audio ver 4.1.02[/li]
[li]Lame 3.97b2 [/li]
[li] Divx 6.2.5[/li]
[li] AC3 .07b[/li]
[li]AC3-ACM 1.21 [/li]
[/list]

I might have a few others that I forgot.

Thanks,

Jon

[Alex B]

Ogg 2.83-aoTuVb4.51P3

MC 11.1 uses the latest reference Vorbis encoder, but aoTuV 4.51b is most likely a bit better at lower bitrates without any disadvantages.

Replace the oggenc.exe file in the [Media Center program path]\Plugins\ folder with your preferred version. (If the new file is named as oggenc2.exe rename it first.)

Monkeys Audio ver 4.1.02

You cannot change the internally used Monkey's Audio codec. MC uses the latest v.3.99 compression. AFAIK, the v.4.0x does not have any compression format changes. Matt from JRiver could tell you more about this.

Lame 3.97b2

MC 11.1 uses this codec version by default.

If needed you can change the lame.exe file in the [Media Center program path]\Plugins\ folder.


With the External Encoder option you can use many alternative audio codecs, but that is not as straightforward as replacing the oggenc.exe or lame.exe file.

Divx 6.2.5
AC3 .07b
AC3-ACM 1.21

MC uses OS level video (& video-audio track) decompression codecs. If you have the codecs installed properly they should work.

You may want to try the "FFDShow" DirectShow codec pack. It handles all DivX/XviD and Dolby Digital decoding needs fine and has a lot of configuration options.

I have recently used this FFDShow build with good results and stability: http://dvd.box.sk/index.php?pid=soft&prj=info&rid=8322 (FFDSHOW 2006-04-20 SSE)

[jolo]

Alex,

Thanks for the great information.

That is super that I could just change the version of LAME to the version I prefer. With 3.97b2, I also changed the command set that I used to use with earlier versions. I hope I can slip that in, and change them depending on the output that I need.

I think you are correct abouot Divx. I just selected a Divx movie and Media Center played it by looking at the "DrirectX" player and I see that Directx must have called up Divx, where I see the icon for it in the lower right hand corner. 

The latest version of Divx is just pure fantastic. I have two stand alone DVD players that play Divx (or MPEG4) video. The output is of such high quality, as well as the sound  that I have been going back to re-encode any XVID and older DIVX videos that I have.  I also use some on my Palm Tungsten T3 PDA and play them in their native Divx format.

I would like to post this as a potential enhacement, not as a criticism at all !!

I would like to be able to post different codecs somewhere, like a "add-in" folder. Sort of the way it is done with VirtualDub. In thiis way, I can select the plug-ins the MC uses, but also select a newer or different codec if I would like.

[glynor]

You may want to try the "FFDShow" DirectShow codec pack. It handles all DivX/XviD and Dolby Digital decoding needs fine and has a lot of configuration options.

I'm being a complete and utter anal-retentive video encoding nerd here, but....  (There's always a but after those statements isn't there?)

[BEGIN Video Nerd Block]
FFDShow isn't really codec pack, it's a set of DirectShow filters.  The difference is slight or huge depending on how you look at it, and how you use your video.

A codec is, by definition, an EnCOder/DECoder (hence the name).  The idea is that it is a piece of hardware or software that can end-to-end handle both the encoding process (for video file "authoring") and the decoding process (for video "consumption" by the end user).  They are often used in a bi-directional situation, such as in videoconferencing (a popular videoconferencing codec is h.323).

FFDShow is typically only used as a decode filter (though it does contain a VFW codec -- the libavcodec from the ffmpeg project).  While it can be used to put some cool effects on videos when authoring them, it is generally used in tandem with another codec to actually encode the video (such as XviD).  What FFDShow really excels at is video playback and filtering/post-processing.  It has powerful filters which can really clean up videos, and the newer versions also will handle audio processing as well.  It's kind of a video DSP, that also handles the decode chores as part of it's magic.

If you want to create video (or re-encode video from another source), you'll need a real codec pack.  If you only want to play video back, then FFDShow is really most (if not all) of what you need.

On a side note, generally in blind video quality and perfomance tests, XviD wins out for MPEG-4 ASP (Advanced Simple Profile) codecs-- even over newer versions of the DivX codec.  You may want to check out the latest codec comparison tests at Doom9 here before you go converting all those old videos.  XviD is generally considered superior to all but the more advanced MPEG-4 Part 10 (Advanced Video Coding) codecs such as x264, Ateme, and Nero Digital.  AVC codecs are definitely up-and-coming, but generally aren't supported as well by hardware devices, and the applications used to author files aren't as mature (or user friendly).

Also, keep in mind that converting from a lossy format (like any MPEG-4 compressed video) to another lossy format is going to result in a generational loss.  You won't improve playback quality, you'll only make it worse.  It's just like re-encoding an MP3 to a FLAC doesn't magically improve it's playback quality (it just makes it take up more space).

The best bet is to get the best playback engine possible, and that's FFDShow.
[END Video Nerd Block]

[jolo]

 :Dglynor,

Thanks for the information.

I would like to say that my choice of products and codecs are what I like the most and I feel that what other people do is what they like the most. There are differences in what is important as far as listening and watching.  There is also a great indovidual difference on the "hassle" factor. How much time and fuss do they want to put in.
I also am of the belief that for any numbers and stats, everything comes down to what individuals prefer for hearing, watching and their preferred media type(s), and hardware.

Two things on the audio why I like ogg as my favorite lossy format.

• It is open source, and without royalties. Microsoft and Apple hate it, although I have been seeing it used more and more, if I install PC games for my kids.
• For me personally, I think I hear a fuller, more complete sound than MP3 and when I use that aoTuVb4.51P3 version of Ogg (from rarewares.com), at a quality level of 5 or 6, I cannot hear the differernce from a DVD or the original.

I think I may stay with the cute front ends that I am currently working with.
I would say that ogg is my codec of choice for portable listening.  I use my Palm Tungsten T3, with a 2gb SD card and Pocket Tunes software on my Palm, which is excellent and flexible with audio formats, for portable listening.
I am truly proud to say that I have never downloaded anything (or ever will), from ITunes and I only once, had a DRM crippled audio file on my PC. After I figured out how to remove the DRM, I deleted the file and just won't bother with any DRM.
I also can use ogg on my DVD players. I usually listen to money's APE format when listening to music on my PC.
I use this adorable little program oggdrop. I also use AlltoLame as a front end as well. I just want to say, to be different, I never use EAC, although I use to use it. If the audio source is of high quality, I do not understand the reason for all the fuss. I do believe that EAC must be great is the audio source is not in great shape and a CD or possibly a record is being ripped. But, from a quality CD, I don't see the difference from MC or EAC in the rip. I also will use Cdex, the newer beta version to rip.

I like to take whatever media I have and first do a byte for bye, image file create.  Then put my original media away in a safe spot, as my image file serves as an exact backup.  From there I can do whatever I want,  create other formats, or just listen to the image file. When one is listening from a byte for byte exact copy, that truly is as lossless as one can get.
hear what you said about re-encoding from one compressed movie format to another is analogous to converting from a lossy audio format to another.
I am not sure that it is exactly the same as audio, but you have way more technical knowledge than me in this and I respect your thoughts on that.

I appreciate the link to the analysis and blind tests, but from my "own eyes and ears" test here is what I have seen:

• The acceptance of Divx on more and more stand alone DVD players is of utmost importance to me. That is where I evaluate videos from and it is important for my home movies as well as backups and edited videos that I can play them and share them with friends and family.
• When the cost of the DVD plus Divx DVD players hit from $40 - $50, it made a great difference in how I would use Divx.
• This part is views and heard from my PC. If I re-encode a Xvid created video and when I create Divx from a DVD source, I see a dramatic improvement in the video quality. I find the colors much more alive, the elimination of any synch issues, a consistency and smoothness of the output and a video that looks about identical as the original.
  [li]On the PC end, there has been I feel a dramtic improvement in the Divx player quality.
• I find that Divx 6.25, with Virtualdub, doing a 2 pass encode, with the audio re-synched on the last pass only, is the best looking compressed, most compatible and errorless output that I have ever used.
• While most of the Divx pack is free, at $19.95 for the pro version of all of their tools, I have never had to pay an upgrade fee. I hope the Divx Labs folks get to make a living and I really hope that a non-Microsoft/Apple format keeps spreading to all DVD players, etc.  They do base their products and upgrades on user input from the forums.
• I have to admit that after a couple of years of doing this audo/video stuff as a hobby, I allowed my self to get my head spun up and down,  spend countless hours in reading some of the super technical stuff from vcdhelp.com, hydrogenaudio.org and Doom. I think that some of the most humorous battles I have seen between some heavy duty tech engineers was on hydrogenaudio, when this string went on and on about one encoding technique was better than another. What was humorous to me about it, was that the argument was about differences in frequencies that the human ear cannot hear !!
  But I have learned so much from all of the brilliant audio/video engineers. I just had to work out my own style and what was best for me.
• No matter how much large audio/video oligopolies try , the RIAA and MPAA tries and congress gets paid off to create law after law to limit creativity. Even to go to the extent of blaming their top customers for bad movie scripts, bad movies, stupid region codes, copy protection schemes, arrests of children and old ladies, lack of creativity with Hollywood movies (Rocky 100000000 is about to come out, with a 60 year old Sly Stallone), payola,  attacks on librarians and trying to control art, the field of audio/video keeps changing daily and getting more and more interesting.

Jon

[marko]

* marko nods

[jolo]

Marko,

WOW, I am honored (truly),  to get a "nod" from you.

Although I got into a rant and I hopwe the "nod" was not that you were nodding out from bordom at my rant.

I think things have improved with products and availability of "guides" or tutorials.
I believe a couple of years ago, it seemed like so many people were being advised at some of the techie forums to use about ten different products, and do about 10 passes. Some would go between 8 to 24 hours per video.

I also have wondered why on many of the testing I have seen to compare enoding methods in audio, it appears that the lowest bit rates get most of the focus.

I DO know that, the more I learn,  I get mor educated in learning what I don't know.

Thanks,

Jon

[newsposter]

www.free-codecs.com

[glynor]

I agree with basically everything you said (and search my old posts here if you want to see any of my opinions on DRM and free software -- libre, not necessarily gratis).  I completely agree that people should decide for themselves what works best by judging with their own eyes and ears.  My only comment is...

• The acceptance of Divx on more and more stand alone DVD players is of utmost importance to me. That is where I evaluate videos from and it is important for my home movies as well as backups and edited videos that I can play them and share them with friends and family.

XviD is generally equally compatible with these players, as long as you do not enable some of the more advanced options (which are also available in DivX 6 and also incompatible).  I have and use at work a number of DivX-capable DVD players, and none of them (even ones that don't explicitly mention XviD in the compatibility list) have ever given me problems with XviD encodes that I've made.  The formats are extremely similar.  Keep in mind, XivD was originally a "fork" of the DivX development, when the decision was made by some of the developers to make DivX closed-source and for profit.  The "open sourcers" went to the XviD project.  In fact, it makes sense if you think about it!  The FFMPEG libavcodec is able to decode both of those encoding "formats" -- and that is probably the base of the decoder used in most of those DVD players since it is liberally licensed and open source.

One of the reasons that I prefer XviD is that I can't really see any quality difference between it and a DivX 6 encoded video (neither is perfect, but both are very good).  My logic goes that if I can't see a quality difference, I will default to the free (Open Source and freeware in this case) application because of my above stated ideals.  If you do see a quality difference, and it's worth the $20.00 --- more power to you!

My personal preference for FFDSHOW as a playback engine is more to do with convenience than anything else.  It gives me one consistent interface for adjusting the playback of just about all of my media (as it handles a lot more than just XviD/DivX playback -- it will also handle OOG, AC3, FLAC, and a dizzying array of video compression types).

My only big technical caution is on the re-encoding old media.  I have personally seen the generational loss from doing this (because those older formats' errors are just different enough from the new errors to cause an overall degradation).  If you insist, be sure to carefully compare each of the transcodes to the source in a blind test to verify that the quality is really improved (or at least no different).

[jgreen]

Attacks on librarians? 

[glynor]

I know!!  With machetes and other implements-of-destruction.