How to play m2t files on HD extender

[voidpt]

My mkv's with VC-1 all have audio in AC3 (converted from EAC3). Server is 6.4.6RC.

[Whitey]

I sucessfully watched The Invasion (VC1/ac3) last night with only one hicup with the latest beta firmware and WHS software. 3:10 to Yuma (VC1/ac3) still stutters every few minutes and so does Casino Royale (H.264/ac3). Getting better but still not perfect on my system.

Whitey

[ozfiles]

Another good program I have found for converting the dts audio to ac3 is DAudioK, http://www.rockassoftware.pt.vu/.
It's a simply GUI and does a very good job.

[camens]

My BD rips to MKV have produced stuttering video on the HD-100. (3:10 to Yuma and Flags of our Fathers stutter....16 Blocks doesn't but I haven't watched the entire video yet).

Does it matter which codec the server is running? Can you change the codec for the HD-100? I thought I read something about this but can't find it.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by camens

Does it matter which codec the server is running?

No, the HD100 does all the decoding.

Can you change the codec for the HD-100?

No, it always uses it's built in hardware decoder.

[camens]

Thanks. Not sure what is left to try other than waiting for more firmware upgrades.

[voidpt]

I've been trying to find a balance to utilize the HD Extender features. Using MKV's as container. My question, if anyone can answer. What do people do with different kind of audio formats ?

As of now I have found AC3 640kbps and DTS 1536kbps to work through HD Exender (inside a MKV).

So what is the best path to take for different audio formats. For now I'm thinking:
AC3 -> AC3 (no change)
DTS -> DTS (no change)
DTS MA/HD -> DTS (taking out the 'Core')
E-AC3 -> DTS 1536kbit (recode)

Any thoughs ?

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by voidpt

I've been trying to find a balance to utilize the HD Extender features. Using MKV's as container. My question, if anyone can answer. What do people do with different kind of audio formats ?

As of now I have found AC3 640kbps and DTS 1536kbps to work through HD Exender (inside a MKV).

So what is the best path to take for different audio formats. For now I'm thinking:
AC3 -> AC3 (no change)
DTS -> DTS (no change)
DTS MA/HD -> DTS (taking out the 'Core')
E-AC3 -> DTS 1536kbit (recode)

Any thoughs ?

Thats probably the way to keep the highest quality audio. The only thing I would add is if there is already a 5.1 AC3 stream on the BD I would keep it rather than re-encoding. I also like to always go with DD AC3 for the best compatibility (some day I'll have a secondary TV w/ the HD100 and it won't have a DTS decoder), saves space too.

[voidpt]

Originally Posted by lobosrul

Thats probably the way to keep the highest quality audio. The only thing I would add is if there is already a 5.1 AC3 stream on the BD I would keep it rather than re-encoding. I also like to always go with DD AC3 for the best compatibility (some day I'll have a secondary TV w/ the HD100 and it won't have a DTS decoder), saves space too.

Good points. Hadn't though about the non-DTS decoder. Not a problem for me now, but could be in future. I'm still not sure about the E-AC3 vs AC3. If I have 2 tracks to choose from, one in E-AC3 5.1 1536kbit/s, and one in AC3 5.1 640kbit/s. I'm still tempted to recode the E-AC3 to DTS 1536kbit/s. But you might be right that the 'native' AC3 would be good enough. And the compatibility would be better for equipment. Choices choices ...

[valnar]

Originally Posted by voidpt

Good points. Hadn't though about the non-DTS decoder. Not a problem for me now, but could be in future. I'm still not sure about the E-AC3 vs AC3. If I have 2 tracks to choose from, one in E-AC3 5.1 1536kbit/s, and one in AC3 5.1 640kbit/s. I'm still tempted to recode the E-AC3 to DTS 1536kbit/s. But you might be right that the 'native' AC3 would be good enough. And the compatibility would be better for equipment. Choices choices ...

I have a hard time hearing the difference between AC3 and DTS on my cheap system but can hear it on my high-end system fairly easily. I don't have any HD Audio formats (yet).

I suppose it always depends on how much fidelity you want vs space vs audio capability. If your receiver + speakers cost less than $2000, I'd say AC3 is okay. If they are $2000+, or you say "Valnar, what's a receiver? I have a pre-amp, processor and 7x300w amplifier", then you already know the answer.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by valnar

I have a hard time hearing the difference between AC3 and DTS on my cheap system but can hear it on my high-end system fairly easily. I don't have any HD Audio formats (yet).

I suppose it always depends on how much fidelity you want vs space vs audio capability. If your receiver + speakers cost less than $2000, I'd say AC3 is okay. If they are $2000+, or you say "Valnar, what's a receiver? I have a pre-amp, processor and 7x300w amplifier", then you already know the answer.

Yup, there is no difference

What's a receiver?

[voidpt]

Originally Posted by valnar

If they are $2000+, or you say "Valnar, what's a receiver? I have a pre-amp, processor and 7x300w amplifier", then you already know the answer.

Lol Well, I guess I'm just above the $2000 mark. I have a Yamaha RX-V2700 receiver. Got it to primarily to test out uncompressed 5.1 sound from my Blu-Ray players through HDMI. Yes I have to have 2 players because of A & B regions That's one thing HD-DVD got right, no stupid regions. The +/- 1GB of 1536kbit/s vs 640kbit/s does not matter much. So I think I'm going for 1536kbit/s when possible (from TrueHD & E-AC3).

[eepmatt]

This may be an incredibly stupid question but why go through the demuxing and remerging process at all? I ran a test disc the other day through tsMuxer, and instead of demuxing I just had it convert the m2ts file to a ts file.

That ts file would play with absolutely no stuttering on my hd100. It did, however, have 1 problem: areas of high contrast picked up minor artifacts when played through the HD100. For instance, twinkles in characters eyes had jitter not on the original blu ray. The HD-100 also had trouble with herringbone suits, picking up artifacts there as well. These problems were not present in the ts file itself... I could play it on my computer and it looked exactly as good as the original blu ray. The HD100 is connected via HDMI, so to me it seems it's the hd100 itself that is introducing the problem.

I'm assuming placing the files in a different container won't help. While the artifacts weren't major, they are deal killers for me, since the whole point of bluray is the quality. I just preordered a popcorn hour a110, which purports to be able to play m2ts streams and pass through dolby true hd and DTS-MA audio. It will be interesting to see how it does....

[autoboy]

eepmatt

It sounds like your HD100 is outputting 1080i instead of 1080p. Those kinds of artifacts sound like deinterlacing issues because your TV is doing a bad job deinterlacing.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by eepmatt

This may be an incredibly stupid question but why go through the demuxing and remerging process at all? I ran a test disc the other day through tsMuxer, and instead of demuxing I just had it convert the m2ts file to a ts file.

With most Blu-ray, yes, there's really no point. I'm currently using TSMuxeR to just rebuild the main movie playlist as a new "Blu-ray Disc". It creates the blu-ray structure and (AFAIK) creates the info needed for chapter support.

So far, these M2TS files play fine on my HD200*. I've chosen to do it this way because Sage has indicated they are "working on" (or was it "looking into"?) supporting basic Blu-ray structures (I assume this means recognizing the structure as a single object, like a DVD, and providing chapter support for the main movie).

That * is because rips with TrueHD audio with 448k AC3 core aren't very happy at the moment for some reason.

On the flip side, it seems like HD DVD rips require remuxing.

That ts file would play with absolutely no stuttering on my hd100. It did, however, have 1 problem: areas of high contrast picked up minor artifacts when played through the HD100. For instance, twinkles in characters eyes had jitter not on the original blu ray. The HD-100 also had trouble with herringbone suits, picking up artifacts there as well. These problems were not present in the ts file itself... I could play it on my computer and it looked exactly as good as the original blu ray. The HD100 is connected via HDMI, so to me it seems it's the hd100 itself that is introducing the problem.

What resolution are you outputting?

[Lucas]

I find that I don't even need to use TSMuxeR.

I just open the .m2ts files directly and they play fine on the HD200.

Granted, I don't have much of a Bluray collection, around 15 titles or so.

[stanger89]

Yeah, but it seems like most movies are split into two m2ts files, so you'd have to switch half way through. TSmuxeR is mainly to get rid of all the excess crap that I don't want.

[_Demo_]

Originally Posted by stanger89

So far, these M2TS files play fine on my HD200*. I've chosen to do it this way because Sage has indicated they are "working on" (or was it "looking into"?) supporting basic Blu-ray structures (I assume this means recognizing the structure as a single object, like a DVD, and providing chapter support for the main movie).

That * is because rips with TrueHD audio with 448k AC3 core aren't very happy at the moment for some reason.

Do you still have issues using the latest beta firmware?

_Demo_

[stanger89]

The 20090128 (IIRC), I uploaded a sample and emailed betatest over the weekend. If there's a newer version, no I haven't tried it, but I will