Thanks again, JuiceWSA. It took me a little over 6 minutes to normalize an AAC track, but that’s with a 4 year old Core i3 and a separate HandBrake encode going.
The normalized track sounds good to me. I used the default codec (Fraunhofer FDK AAC), any comments on whether I should continue using that or switch to plain-old AAC?
That coder is fine, just make sure you’re using LC (Low Complexity) - an option near the bottom. HC is incompatible with many devices - my Rokus and Fire TV being among them. Everything used to be LC, but now it’s different and everyone gets in a panic when they see ‘Low Complexity’ thinking it’s somehow not as good. It’s as good as it ever was.
The only difference I hear is LC makes great audio tracks and HC makes tracks that sound like a train wreck. 
Ha, I’ll be sure to avoid HC then.
I think I’m all set then. I know everything I need to know. I guess you could say I got Juiced! (er, wait, no, please don’t say that)
If you think that a 30Mb/s HD bluray looks good at 3Mb/s someone needs to get their eyes checked.
@Stephen3001 said:
If you think that a 30Mb/s HD bluray looks good at 3Mb/s someone needs to get their eyes checked.
I use the eyeballs in my head. If my eyeballs can’t see the difference why should I waste the space?
You’ll have to use the eyeballs in your head. That guide takes you up to the point where your eyeballs are needed. You take it from there.
@ubce88m said:
Ha, I’ll be sure to avoid HC then.I think I’m all set then. I know everything I need to know. I guess you could say I got Juiced! (er, wait, no, please don’t say that)
One more thing.
If encodes are taking entirely too long sacrifice a teenie bit of compression (100Mb or so) and change every setting in the advanced section to defaults except Reference Frames. Set that to 1. A reference frame plays no part in quality. It’s purpose is to allow the encoder more reference points to improve compression. It does this at the cost of increased encode time. More frames to check means longer time to check them.
Hey, good to know. Thanks JuiceWSA!
@JuiceWSA said:
I use the eyeballs in my head. If my eyeballs can’t see the difference why should I waste the space?
You’ll have to use the eyeballs in your head. That guide takes you up to the point where your eyeballs are needed. You take it from there.
Its already using lossy compression to get to 30Mb/s from 1.5 Gb/s…Now your just throwing away more of the picture to get down to 3Mb/s. 1080p at that compression looks terrible.
@Stephen3001 said:
@JuiceWSA said:
I use the eyeballs in my head. If my eyeballs can’t see the difference why should I waste the space?
You’ll have to use the eyeballs in your head. That guide takes you up to the point where your eyeballs are needed. You take it from there.
Its already using lossy compression to get to 30Mb/s from 1.5 Gb/s…Now your just throwing away more of the picture to get down to 3Mb/s. 1080p at that compression looks terrible.
I’m curious where you’re getting that figure. 1.5 Gb/s (with a small b) is equal to 675 GB/h (with a capital B).
Not saying that you can’t tell the difference between 30 Mb/s and 3 Mb/s, just wondering where 1.5 Gb/s came from.
@ubce88m said:
@Stephen3001 said:
@JuiceWSA said:
I use the eyeballs in my head. If my eyeballs can’t see the difference why should I waste the space?
You’ll have to use the eyeballs in your head. That guide takes you up to the point where your eyeballs are needed. You take it from there.
Its already using lossy compression to get to 30Mb/s from 1.5 Gb/s…Now your just throwing away more of the picture to get down to 3Mb/s. 1080p at that compression looks terrible.
I’m curious where you’re getting that figure. 1.5 Gb/s (with a small b) is equal to 675 GB/h (with a capital B).
Not saying that you can’t tell the difference between 30 Mb/s and 3 Mb/s, just wondering where 1.5 Gb/s came from.
Again - and finally - if the eyeballs in your head tell you that you need more bit rate use more bit rate. Use whatever bit rate it takes to give you happy feet. Nobody can see through your eyeballs, but you. I use the bit rate that gives me happy feet. My eyeballs tell me what bit rate I need, but if some miracle happens and these 60+ year old eyeballs suddenly start moving back in time to see as well as they did when they were 15 I can always pull out the disc and jack up the bit rate. Until then I’m quite happy with the bit rate my eyeballs told me I needed and I’ll save the space on my HDDs in the process.
There are not too many advantages to being aged, but one of them is being able to pick a bulls&%tter out of a crowd at a glance and another is being able to save a lot of space on my Hard Drives due to the onset of age related blindness.
The guide is bulletproof and contains some variables. Use the variables that make your eyeballs happy.
The 1.5Gb/s (1.485 for precision) is the uncompressed bitrate for a HD 1080i 25fps video signal…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncompressed_video
I work in the professional video industry and work with compression equipment both real time and file based every single day. I feel I am more than qualified to pass comment on bad advice, particularly with regards to compression, given in a forum.
Well… in that case maybe you should write your own guide because I need some help Direct Playing a 1.5Gbps stream through my Server’s 6Mbps upload speed to my Droid Razr while I’m sitting in the waiting room at the Dr’s Office. I can’t even hammer a 30Mbps stream into that 6Mbps pipe. On a good day - if not too many Hog Castratin’ Videos are in progress in the neighborhood - I can watch a 3.5Mbps stream (that looks pretty good to me) so I must be doing something wrong there Professor.
=))
I’m just saying that the assertion that 3Mb/s for a HD full resolution picture is no different to a 30Mb/s picture is wrong. By its very nature compression is a destructive process, it throws picture information away to achieve these levels. At 3Mb/s I would say that too much information has been thrown away to provide an artifact free picture.
Especially if you are doing this on big screens. There’s no where to hide low bitrates on big screen TV’s. People who use Rokus are more often than not going to be plugging it into a Big Screen TV. (From the title ‘DVD Rip Quality on Plex/Roku Ultra’). The experience won’t be good for them if they have to suffer through low bitrate poor quality pictures.
I don’t use handbrake, I don’t recompress videos on my storage. If I do need it on a device where I need a reduced bitrate I let Plex do the job as it was intended to do. I watch these 30Mb/s videos on my phone when I am away from home. I don’t have anywhere near as much upload bandwidth as you, just a mere 700kb/s. However Plex does it’s job well and produces a stream that is perfectly viewable on a screen the size of a Phone. I wouldn’t watch it on a large screen television, but on a 4.5 inch phone its just fine.
If personally you like banding, edge aliasing, softness in your 3.5Mb/s ‘Hog Butcherin Videos’ then go ahead, no argument from me. If you post it as a guide for other users I’m just going to point out what I feel is an error.
@Stephen3001 said:
I’m just saying that the assertion that 3Mb/s for a HD full resolution picture is no different to a 30Mb/s picture is wrong.
Nobody said that. Since you’re ramming your words into my mouth what else would you like for me to say?
By its very nature compression is a destructive process, it throws picture information away to achieve these levels. At 3Mb/s I would say that too much information has been thrown away to provide an artifact free picture.
Well, Doc - I would say that is a matter of opinion. As I’ve said about 50 times already USE THE FRICKIN’ BIT RATE YOU WANT, DOCTOR STRANGE! What is your problem?
Especially if you are doing this on big screens. There’s no where to hide low bitrates on big screen TV’s. People who use Rokus are more often than not going to be plugging it into a Big Screen TV. (From the title ‘DVD Rip Quality on Plex/Roku Ultra’). The experience won’t be good for them if they have to suffer through low bitrate poor quality pictures.
Waaaaaaa… Waaaaaaaa… Waaaaaaaaaa…
Ok then. You’re not invited to the next Movie Night at my house. Everybody else seems to enjoy themselves, but clearly you’d be out on the back porch hurling up your cream of wheat due to such horrible quality.
I don’t use handbrake, I don’t recompress videos on my storage. If I do need it on a device where I need a reduced bitrate I let Plex do the job as it was intended to do. I watch these 30Mb/s videos on my phone when I am away from home. I don’t have anywhere near as much upload bandwidth as you, just a mere 700kb/s. However Plex does it’s job well and produces a stream that is perfectly viewable on a screen the size of a Phone. I wouldn’t watch it on a large screen television, but on a 4.5 inch phone its just fine.
Could you get some enjoyment out of it if you watched it on a Sigmoidoscope ('cause I’d really love to tell you where to put this line of interrogation)?
If personally you like banding, edge aliasing, softness in your 3.5Mb/s ‘Hog Butcherin Videos’ then go ahead, no argument from me. If you post it as a guide for other users I’m just going to point out what I feel is an error.
Never seen any banding, edge aliasing or softness here - like I said my eyeballs tell me what to do. I just do it. Why don’t you let your eyeballs tell you what to do like everybody else does?
Some people like to knock bit rates down to a reasonable, view-able quality and create material that will Direct Play and transfer easily over limited internet connections. My guide was written for them, not for you - apparently. I don’t come around to your house and complain your videos set my eyeballs on fire. Why all the hate?
:bz
@Stephen3001 said:
If you think that a 30Mb/s HD bluray looks good at 3Mb/s someone needs to get their eyes checked.
This is absolutely correct…
Someone MUST be a little myopic here…
Heck. I can see the difference running on my PC let alone the TV…
LOL
@JuiceWSA
How can you even debate this issue???
I’m debating the fact that you two think I’m trying to impose my quality on unwary citizens when clearly - and I quote - I say:
Use the bit rate you feel you must.
If the bit rate I use isn’t working for you - put in some higher numbers. If you need to encode and you’re not happy with the quality keep putting in higher numbers until you are happy. If you don’t have to encode - don’t.
@JuiceWSA
There’s no hate just trying to point out an error in a guide that some novice will use and then wonder why everything looks bad…
My, you are a bit of a sensitive fellow…
There is no error in my guide.
There is an error in your interpretation of it.
BTW, let me ask you how you watch Live TV?
I suppose that’s a real let-down for you because as I add the second TV Recording from last night to the Handbrake queue (the 2 I didn’t let MCEBuddy deal with automatically) I notice that the maximum bit rate for those MPEG2 video streams at 1080p is about 8Mbps - too low for anyone to make good use of.
How about a Netflix or Amazon Prime membership? I know you don’t go in for all of that because those standard HD streams are no more than about 3.5Mbps and are delivered over wires plugged into the internet. No, you can’t do any of that.
Can you listen to Radio?
Does a Newspaper have enough resolution?
Can you drive a car with a dirty windshield?
What happens when the windshield gets dirty while you’re driving?
=))
I won’t point out the errors you made in your last post about bitrates and formats. I think you need to look after your blood pressure.
@Stephen3001 said:
I won’t point out the errors you made in your last post about bitrates and formats. I think you need to look after your blood pressure.
You can certainly try but here on Planet Earth are a couple of RAW WTV Recordings that will refute any further attempts of obfuscation on your part:
The first one indicates a rare circumstance - a whopping 10Mbps MPEG2 stream - still too low for you to gain any enjoyment out of and the second contains the more normal 7-8Mbps MPEG2 stream - way too low for you to even consider watching (both of which were converted to MP4s at 3.5Mbps after processing (decombing, audio conversion to AAC2.0, container swapping) matching, renaming, restructuring and being placed automatically in the library where they’re ready for viewing.
If you like I’ll explain to you little areas of physics like bandwidth for transmitted Television Signals at the frequencies they’re pretty much locked into and the real reason behind the need to transmit two 1920x540 frames then weave those back together by magic to make one 1920x1080 frame for your (well not yours certainly) viewing pleasure (sometimes during ‘post-production’ we often wish that magic was as good in our recording devices as it is in our TV Tuners, but it is what it is).
My blood pressure is fine - so long as I keep taking the tablets.
How’s yours - and exactly what are those tablets you’re taking?
