Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
![]() |
#6641 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 89
|
Quote:
However, this is a forum that pretty much evolves around compression efficiency, i.e. saving bits where we don't see or hear it. This is why I (and plenty others here too) take these lossless audio streams and compress them to 200-600kbit/s AAC or opus. And while these codecs are obviously far superior to the ancient AC-3, you'd be surprised how good 640kbit/s Dolby Digital really is. Accordingly, if the same master (and volume) is used, you would most likely fail in telling TrueHD apart from Dolby Digital, if you don't know which is playing. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6642 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,550
|
Quote:
![]() I'm not familiar with compressing audio 'to 200-600kbit/s AAC or opus' myself, so I'll take your word on those codecs.
__________________
Gorgeous, delicious, deculture! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6643 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,373
|
Quote:
At least DTS has a "core" you can use for a direct comparison, since it has to be from the same master. If you were to decode both the core and the full HD stream to PCM and send that PCM to your "HD Amp", I'm positive that in most cases you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference. What these devices do is cheat you by playing with volume and EQ settings that play towards how people perceive audio. Just a slight bit more volume for HD, and most people already perceive it as "better", and there is more such tricks. Or take a HD track and re-encode it as AC3, just to ensure its the same master, and then decode both back to PCM and send that to the Amp so the Amp does not know what the original format was. There is a lot of trickery to try to sell you on "HD" stuff, because they had to sell you something, and in fact the audio quality difference have been minimal for years. If one really goes deep into it on a technical level, you'll eventually find that out. If you just blindly trust the Amp, then sure, HD probably sounds better to you, but not because its HD audio, but because the Amp cheats you.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders Last edited by nevcairiel; 15th January 2019 at 15:51. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6644 | Link | |
RipBot264 author
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 7,915
|
Quote:
TrueHD can sounds better than AC3 640kbps only if was encoded from better source or your amp is doing some tricks boosting artificially volume for some frequencies. (bass/trebles). If 128kbps OPUS/AAC is transparent for 2.0 then I see no reason why 320kbps wouldn't be enough for 5.1.
__________________
Windows 7 Image Updater - SkyLake\KabyLake\CoffeLake\Ryzen Threadripper Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 15th January 2019 at 16:31. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6645 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 89
|
Quote:
We don't doubt you hear a difference! But that difference is not based on codec superiority, but mastering, volume, dynamic compression and so forth. However, we are turning in circles here, it's all been said already. You either do some legwork yourself and compare apples with apples, or you keep believing. ![]() BTW, lossless-capable AVRs have been around for at least 10 years... Do you really think you are the only person here who owns one? Sorry for the off-topic loop, let's get back to x265. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6646 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,956
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6647 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,956
|
Quote:
Lossless or near lossless for sources makes sense, to the degree the extra information can eventually result in a detectable difference in derived content. Lossless, if used at all, is only used for archiving deep in studios. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6651 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1
|
hi guys. Where can I find changelog for x265 3.0 ???
on official site, changelog exists only for version 2.9 another question : When Ryzen 2 get out around this June, would this processor have much better performance in x265 encoding, while AMD put 256-bit AVX2 now, along with many other notable improvments. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6653 | Link | |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,956
|
Quote:
https://bitbucket.org/multicoreware/.../branch/stable |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6654 | Link | |
Registered Loser
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 119
|
x265 3.0 Release is out!
Looks like 3.0 is finally released! Congrats to the team! Here are the release notes:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6655 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,567
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6656 | Link |
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 4,956
|
--hevc-aq overrides whatever --aq-mode is set to. I suspect that --aq-strength may get overridden itself, with --aq-adaption-range being the equivalent. Or both parameters could be used together, ala the interaction of CRF with maxrate/bufsize.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6657 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 116
|
@excellentswordfight
I've come to the same conclusion as well. merange should be based off of the CTU. If you leave CTU at 64 then merange should also be reduced. It'll be searching outside of it's original block. Not to say that is bad necessarily though. I've seen certain "high quality" encodes that use meranges larger than the CTU. I'm not 100% sold that it provides tangible differences thoughs. I personally drop merange to 26 when using CTU 32. Since I never plan on using hex search I should probably change merange to 58 when using CTU64... Best way to find out is to try it for yourself. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6658 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
Intel's top of the line 18 core CPU only has 2 AVX512 units on it. Imagine a Zen 2 CPU with up to 8 AVX512 fused units!!! I know there is an extra cycle or two when doing a fused operation but still up to 8 AVX512 operations will be nice! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6659 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,567
|
Quote:
Quote:
![]() Questions are: a. is '--aq-strength' an option for both '--aq-mode' and '--hevc-aq' or just '--aq-mode'? b. is '--aq-adaption-range' an option for both '--aq-mode' and '--hevc-aq' or just '--hevc-aq'? Cu Selur |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6660 | Link | |
Registered Developer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 10,373
|
Quote:
256-bit AVX on current Ryzen isn't that much faster then 128-bit SSE due to that. In any case, there have been zero hints about AVX512 support.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|