m2t playback at DVinfo.net

Jack McCann · January 1st, 2005, 02:42 PM

Hi,

This has probably been answered like a trillion times but I've looked around and haven't found the exact answers I'm looking for.

I have downloaded a few raw 1080i .m2t files from the Sony FX-1 and have had some problem playing them back from my system without dropped frames (plays really jerky in spots). From what I've read, my system is fast enought to handle the HDV video from the FX-1 but it still drops fames like crazy. Am I missing something here?? Do I need a faster processor or more RAM? My system specs are:

P4 2.8 Ghz
512 MB Ram
Nvidia GeforceFX Go5600 64MB

Also, Does the Sony FX-1 have the option to record in 720p mode as well as 1080i?

Thanks for the help people,

J

Brandon Greenlee · January 1st, 2005, 03:38 PM

I can't really help you on the jerky playback other than say I too experience this although my specs are much lower than yours (1.7ghz 512mb)

As for your other question: No the FX-1 will not record to 720p.

However if you wish to play back 720p from the JVC for example it will do this fine. I believe all HDV camcorders can play back both types, however at this point they will only record to one or the other.

David Kennett · January 1st, 2005, 04:10 PM

Jack,

I've seen a number of statements saying that 2.8 Ghz is fast enough, but I have found that it is not that simple. Here is my experience.

My old P3-900 laptop, OK for DV, was not cutting it for HDV (JVC HD10), so I put together a new editor:

Asus P4C800 MB (800 MHz FSB, Intel 875 chipset)
1GB PC3200 RAM (2 - 512M)
Intel 3.0C P4 (Northwood)
Asus $100 video board (128M, Invidia 5200)

Everything worked beautifully. I could play HD 10 stuff using Elecard and VLC players. I downloaded WMV files from Microsoft, and could easily play both 720p and 1080i files. I could play TS (ATSC) files copied from my DVHS recorder off the air.

I then decided to build a home theater PC using the VERY compact Asus Pundit (AB-P 2600) barebones system (with MB and PS), 533 MHz FSB and Sis chipset:

512MB PC2900 RAM (2 - 256M)
Intel 3.07 GHz P4 (Northwood)
EXTASY Radeon 9200SE video board (128M) (PCI-not AGP)

Disaster! Nothing would play smoothly. I tried a number of things, but the only thing that helped was overclocking to 3.2 GHz. My HD 10 and WMV 720p stuff would play OK, but not WMV 1080i or any over the air stuff. I already had the VLC and Elecard players, and then discovered that the Sasem On Air software that comes with their HDTV tuner would play both 1080i and 720p files from off the air. These are files I copied from a DVHS VCR using DVHStool and firewire. I can still only play WMV 720p files, but that's OK.

I have learned from this that a number of factors affect speed, INCLUDING the software used. I hope this info has been useful.

Jack McCann · January 1st, 2005, 05:51 PM

Thanks so much for the info. I was hoping it wouldn't be so hit or miss playing HDV files, but I guess I am in for a bit of trial and error with my system. The reason I am asking is because if I can't simply play back 1080i HDV, will I be able to capture it in lets say Avid Xpress Prp HD 5.0 or any other HD editing solution?

BTW-the VLC palyer seems to work ok for the 720p stuff but noo too good with the 1080i HDV m2t files. REALLY jerky. So far I have found that Media Player Classic has been the best for smooth playback...much better even than Windoes Media Player 10! Any other suggestions for media players anyone?

Lastly, if I am going to upgrade my system, which should I look at first upgrading? CPU or Ram?

Thanks again for all of the help,

J

Steve Crisdale · January 1st, 2005, 05:57 PM

Jack, there are indeed a number of factors beyond the CPU rating that'll affect HDV m2t playback quality.

Firstly, the fact that you're attempting to watch interlaced FX-1 clips on a progressive monitor. If you haven't got it already; get a hold of VLC player, and play back with de-interlace set to blend....

Secondly, the 25Mbit data-rate is such that any processes going on in your machine (other open appz - anti-virus, disk defrag etc, open folder window...anything) can seriously affect playback smoothness. Even the HD10's 19.3Mbit m2t's suffer in this regard, though not as severely as the FX-1's stream does.

Thirdly, most software players were/are designed around DVD level material, so there's not many appz for playback of recorded HD material from any source.

It may seem unfathomable, given the market HDV is being targeted at, but the best way to view the FX-1 m2t material is straight from the camera via component to a HDTV, and while there's growing support of the HDV format by NLE's, the support for playback of any HD material - let alone HDV - is far from adequate.

Jack McCann · January 1st, 2005, 08:22 PM

Hi Steve,

That tip "de-interlace set to blend" really helped! And actually, I tried the de-interlace set to 'discard' and even better, 'mean' (whichs looks the best) with no dropped frames at all!! Super smooth!

Capturing HDV is really my concern as I plan on purchasing an FX-1 shortly and would love to start cutting footage together with the new Avid Xpress Pro HD software. I guess time will tell.

Thanks for the hlep,

J

Kevin Shaw · January 1st, 2005, 09:56 PM

<<<Capturing HDV is really my concern as I plan on purchasing an FX-1 shortly and would love to start cutting footage together with the new Avid Xpress Pro HD software. >>>

Avid recently announced that they won't support HDV editing until sometime next summer. Try one of the following applications to do HDV work on your current system until then:

Adobe Premiere Pro with Cineform Aspect HD
Sony Vegas 5 with Cineform ConnectHD
Canopus Edius Pro 3

In the long run you'll probably want a more powerful computer for doing HDV work. Dual processors would be a good idea

Brandon Greenlee · January 1st, 2005, 10:48 PM

Is dual processors more beneficial than going 64bit at this point?

(I'm using pp1.5)

Kevin Shaw · January 2nd, 2005, 12:43 AM

<<< Is dual processors more beneficial than going 64bit at this point? (I'm using pp1.5) -->>>

Yes, but dual processors with a 64-bit PCI-X slot will be useful for some HDV editing products. The whole fuss over 64-bit processing and a 64-bit OS is overblown for mainstream video production tasks.

Steve Crisdale · January 2nd, 2005, 07:03 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Shaw : <<< Is dual processors more beneficial than going 64bit at this point? (I'm using pp1.5) -->>>

Yes, but dual processors with a 64-bit PCI-X slot will be useful for some HDV editing products. The whole fuss over 64-bit processing and a 64-bit OS is overblown for mainstream video production tasks. -->>>

It's worth checking on dual-processor support within the NLE you intend to use. I'm aware of the fact that Vegas at this point doesn't necessarily benefit from dual-processors, while appz like TMPGEnc XPress 3 do.

For my money, the fastest and largest hard-disk array one could afford would be of greater benefit.

HD and HDV require the pumping of very large amounts of data across your systems' busses. The idea is to think of reducing data bottlenecks, one of which at the moment, is hard drive read/write access speeds.

Even acceleration software for HDV editing - notably Cineform, is enhanced markedly by having the fastest hard drives....... and preferably in a RAID 0 configuration.

I wouldn't be taking the jump into 64Bit computing until all the hardware has matured, and the available OS offers true 64Bit drivers, along with true 64Bit appz from the major players.
It's starting to look just like the change over from 16Bit to 32Bit..... Deja Vu!!

Brandon Greenlee · January 2nd, 2005, 07:34 AM

Interesting.

So we're going to have to wait for adobe / sony / avid to code in support to enhance their products using 64bit chips before they're be a decent benefit. 64bit processors are not so much a boost in speed as they are a boost in? bandwidth?

I'm pretty sure Premiere benefits well from dual processors. Now the question for me I guess would be would dual processors be worth the cost over a single top of the line intel chip.

Filip Kovcin · January 2nd, 2005, 07:45 AM

sony hdv is not cappable to record in 720p. but in my opinion (i'm not electronic expert) - if this is mentioned in hdv standard - i can bet that we will soon see the camera which can record in both modes.

just look - pro (Z1) camera has everything - 3ccd ; pal and ntsc; 1080i - in 60i and 50i; has "film mode" which simulates 30,24 and 25 frames (in pal setup); has downconverting; records in dv, dvcam and hdv modes ... and can playback 720p.

if i'm not wrong EBU decision was to treat 720p as hdtv standard in europe. so who will deliver the proper equipment for mases?

can you guess?

isn't it suspicious that this camera cannot record 720p. sony did everything but not that single thing? no way!

i can bet that this option is hidden somewhere already!

filip

Steve Crisdale · January 2nd, 2005, 08:19 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Filip Kovcin : sony hdv is not cappable to record in 720p. but in my opinion (i'm not electronic expert) - if this is mentioned in hdv standard - i can bet that we will soon see the camera which can record in both modes.

just look - pro (Z1) camera has everything - 3ccd ; pal and ntsc; 1080i - in 60i and 50i; has "film mode" which simulates 30,24 and 25 frames (in pal setup); has downconverting; records in dv, dvcam and hdv modes ... and can playback 720p.

if i'm not wrong EBU decision was to treat 720p as hdtv standard in europe. so who will deliver the proper equipment for mases?

can you guess?

isn't it suspicious that this camera cannot record 720p. sony did everything but not that single thing? no way!

i can bet that this option is hidden somewhere already!

filip -->>>

Not so sure about that Filip....

Sony has gone out of it's way to squash any intimation it will make HDV 720p camcorders.....and why should they.

The fact that the European HD guidelines are caught up in the usual political wrangling will no doubt mean that 1080i broadcasts by broadcasters fed up with the insoluble impasse will commence somewhere in Europe, forcing the hand of the bureaucrats.

Besides, if they don't, it'll be nice to sit back and watch 1080i as I do now, and know that on the other side of the World they're only watching 720p.

Shouldn't the consumers of Europe be lobbying for the highest possible level of HD delivery, rather than hoping for a manufacturer to lower their hardware standard to match the poor decision making of a disfunctional legislature?

As much as what I've said above is semi-serious, it's also obvious that the conversion to 720p would be done by the broadcaster, just as they convert to and from all the available HD/SD digital interlaced and progressive formats at the moment.

Further, I think you'll find that any HDTVs available in Europe will be 1080/720/576/480 PAL/NTSC capable just as they are here in PAL based Australia, so viewing FX-1e 1080i 50fps material wouldn't present a problem regardless of the EBU's decision either way....

David Kennett · January 2nd, 2005, 04:11 PM

Jack,

I initially edited my HD-10 HDV masterial with P3-900 laptop. Capturing is not the problem. If you can capture DV, then you can capture HDV (with the proper drivers-software of course). I captured with JVC pgm, then edited with JVC (KDDI) editor, then layed everything back to tape. It worked fine, except I was never able to see a smooth playback until it all went back to tape.

Kevin Shaw · January 3rd, 2005, 05:11 PM

<<< it'll be nice to sit back and watch 1080i as I do now, and know that on the other side of the World they're only watching 720p. >>>

Many people consider 720p to be a higher-quality format than 1080i, so don't be too glad that you're going to spend several more years (or decades) watching interlaced video. 720p at 60 frames per second would be the ideal solution, but it doesn't look like we're going to see that any time soon.

January 1st, 2005, 02:42 PM	#1
Jack McCann New Boot Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 16	m2t playback Hi, This has probably been answered like a trillion times but I've looked around and haven't found the exact answers I'm looking for. I have downloaded a few raw 1080i .m2t files from the Sony FX-1 and have had some problem playing them back from my system without dropped frames (plays really jerky in spots). From what I've read, my system is fast enought to handle the HDV video from the FX-1 but it still drops fames like crazy. Am I missing something here?? Do I need a faster processor or more RAM? My system specs are: P4 2.8 Ghz 512 MB Ram Nvidia GeforceFX Go5600 64MB Also, Does the Sony FX-1 have the option to record in 720p mode as well as 1080i? Thanks for the help people, J

January 1st, 2005, 03:38 PM	#2
Brandon Greenlee Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: North Alabama Posts: 242	I can't really help you on the jerky playback other than say I too experience this although my specs are much lower than yours (1.7ghz 512mb) As for your other question: No the FX-1 will not record to 720p. However if you wish to play back 720p from the JVC for example it will do this fine. I believe all HDV camcorders can play back both types, however at this point they will only record to one or the other. __________________ Brandon Greenlee

January 1st, 2005, 04:10 PM	#3
David Kennett Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio Posts: 407	Jack, I've seen a number of statements saying that 2.8 Ghz is fast enough, but I have found that it is not that simple. Here is my experience. My old P3-900 laptop, OK for DV, was not cutting it for HDV (JVC HD10), so I put together a new editor: Asus P4C800 MB (800 MHz FSB, Intel 875 chipset) 1GB PC3200 RAM (2 - 512M) Intel 3.0C P4 (Northwood) Asus $100 video board (128M, Invidia 5200) Everything worked beautifully. I could play HD 10 stuff using Elecard and VLC players. I downloaded WMV files from Microsoft, and could easily play both 720p and 1080i files. I could play TS (ATSC) files copied from my DVHS recorder off the air. I then decided to build a home theater PC using the VERY compact Asus Pundit (AB-P 2600) barebones system (with MB and PS), 533 MHz FSB and Sis chipset: 512MB PC2900 RAM (2 - 256M) Intel 3.07 GHz P4 (Northwood) EXTASY Radeon 9200SE video board (128M) (PCI-not AGP) Disaster! Nothing would play smoothly. I tried a number of things, but the only thing that helped was overclocking to 3.2 GHz. My HD 10 and WMV 720p stuff would play OK, but not WMV 1080i or any over the air stuff. I already had the VLC and Elecard players, and then discovered that the Sasem On Air software that comes with their HDTV tuner would play both 1080i and 720p files from off the air. These are files I copied from a DVHS VCR using DVHStool and firewire. I can still only play WMV 720p files, but that's OK. I have learned from this that a number of factors affect speed, INCLUDING the software used. I hope this info has been useful. __________________ Dave

January 1st, 2005, 10:48 PM	#8
Brandon Greenlee Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: North Alabama Posts: 242	Is dual processors more beneficial than going 64bit at this point? (I'm using pp1.5) __________________ Brandon Greenlee

January 2nd, 2005, 07:34 AM	#11
Brandon Greenlee Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: North Alabama Posts: 242	Interesting. So we're going to have to wait for adobe / sony / avid to code in support to enhance their products using 64bit chips before they're be a decent benefit. 64bit processors are not so much a boost in speed as they are a boost in? bandwidth? I'm pretty sure Premiere benefits well from dual processors. Now the question for me I guess would be would dual processors be worth the cost over a single top of the line intel chip. __________________ Brandon Greenlee

January 1st, 2005, 05:51 PM	#4
Jack McCann New Boot Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 16	Thanks so much for the info. I was hoping it wouldn't be so hit or miss playing HDV files, but I guess I am in for a bit of trial and error with my system. The reason I am asking is because if I can't simply play back 1080i HDV, will I be able to capture it in lets say Avid Xpress Prp HD 5.0 or any other HD editing solution? BTW-the VLC palyer seems to work ok for the 720p stuff but noo too good with the 1080i HDV m2t files. REALLY jerky. So far I have found that Media Player Classic has been the best for smooth playback...much better even than Windoes Media Player 10! Any other suggestions for media players anyone? Lastly, if I am going to upgrade my system, which should I look at first upgrading? CPU or Ram? Thanks again for all of the help, J

January 1st, 2005, 05:57 PM	#5
Steve Crisdale Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Katoomba NSW Australia Posts: 635	Jack, there are indeed a number of factors beyond the CPU rating that'll affect HDV m2t playback quality. Firstly, the fact that you're attempting to watch interlaced FX-1 clips on a progressive monitor. If you haven't got it already; get a hold of VLC player, and play back with de-interlace set to blend.... Secondly, the 25Mbit data-rate is such that any processes going on in your machine (other open appz - anti-virus, disk defrag etc, open folder window...anything) can seriously affect playback smoothness. Even the HD10's 19.3Mbit m2t's suffer in this regard, though not as severely as the FX-1's stream does. Thirdly, most software players were/are designed around DVD level material, so there's not many appz for playback of recorded HD material from any source. It may seem unfathomable, given the market HDV is being targeted at, but the best way to view the FX-1 m2t material is straight from the camera via component to a HDTV, and while there's growing support of the HDV format by NLE's, the support for playback of any HD material - let alone HDV - is far from adequate.

January 1st, 2005, 08:22 PM	#6
Jack McCann New Boot Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 16	Hi Steve, That tip "de-interlace set to blend" really helped! And actually, I tried the de-interlace set to 'discard' and even better, 'mean' (whichs looks the best) with no dropped frames at all!! Super smooth! Capturing HDV is really my concern as I plan on purchasing an FX-1 shortly and would love to start cutting footage together with the new Avid Xpress Pro HD software. I guess time will tell. Thanks for the hlep, J

January 1st, 2005, 09:56 PM	#7
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	<<<Capturing HDV is really my concern as I plan on purchasing an FX-1 shortly and would love to start cutting footage together with the new Avid Xpress Pro HD software. >>> Avid recently announced that they won't support HDV editing until sometime next summer. Try one of the following applications to do HDV work on your current system until then: Adobe Premiere Pro with Cineform Aspect HD Sony Vegas 5 with Cineform ConnectHD Canopus Edius Pro 3 In the long run you'll probably want a more powerful computer for doing HDV work. Dual processors would be a good idea

January 2nd, 2005, 12:43 AM	#9
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	<<< Is dual processors more beneficial than going 64bit at this point? (I'm using pp1.5) -->>> Yes, but dual processors with a 64-bit PCI-X slot will be useful for some HDV editing products. The whole fuss over 64-bit processing and a 64-bit OS is overblown for mainstream video production tasks.

January 2nd, 2005, 07:03 AM	#10
Steve Crisdale Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Katoomba NSW Australia Posts: 635	<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Shaw : <<< Is dual processors more beneficial than going 64bit at this point? (I'm using pp1.5) -->>> Yes, but dual processors with a 64-bit PCI-X slot will be useful for some HDV editing products. The whole fuss over 64-bit processing and a 64-bit OS is overblown for mainstream video production tasks. -->>> It's worth checking on dual-processor support within the NLE you intend to use. I'm aware of the fact that Vegas at this point doesn't necessarily benefit from dual-processors, while appz like TMPGEnc XPress 3 do. For my money, the fastest and largest hard-disk array one could afford would be of greater benefit. HD and HDV require the pumping of very large amounts of data across your systems' busses. The idea is to think of reducing data bottlenecks, one of which at the moment, is hard drive read/write access speeds. Even acceleration software for HDV editing - notably Cineform, is enhanced markedly by having the fastest hard drives....... and preferably in a RAID 0 configuration. I wouldn't be taking the jump into 64Bit computing until all the hardware has matured, and the available OS offers true 64Bit drivers, along with true 64Bit appz from the major players. It's starting to look just like the change over from 16Bit to 32Bit..... Deja Vu!!

January 2nd, 2005, 07:45 AM	#12
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	concerning 720p (conspiracy theory) sony hdv is not cappable to record in 720p. but in my opinion (i'm not electronic expert) - if this is mentioned in hdv standard - i can bet that we will soon see the camera which can record in both modes. just look - pro (Z1) camera has everything - 3ccd ; pal and ntsc; 1080i - in 60i and 50i; has "film mode" which simulates 30,24 and 25 frames (in pal setup); has downconverting; records in dv, dvcam and hdv modes ... and can playback 720p. if i'm not wrong EBU decision was to treat 720p as hdtv standard in europe. so who will deliver the proper equipment for mases? can you guess? isn't it suspicious that this camera cannot record 720p. sony did everything but not that single thing? no way! i can bet that this option is hidden somewhere already! filip

January 2nd, 2005, 08:19 AM	#13
Steve Crisdale Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Katoomba NSW Australia Posts: 635	Re: concerning 720p (conspiracy theory) <<<-- Originally posted by Filip Kovcin : sony hdv is not cappable to record in 720p. but in my opinion (i'm not electronic expert) - if this is mentioned in hdv standard - i can bet that we will soon see the camera which can record in both modes. just look - pro (Z1) camera has everything - 3ccd ; pal and ntsc; 1080i - in 60i and 50i; has "film mode" which simulates 30,24 and 25 frames (in pal setup); has downconverting; records in dv, dvcam and hdv modes ... and can playback 720p. if i'm not wrong EBU decision was to treat 720p as hdtv standard in europe. so who will deliver the proper equipment for mases? can you guess? isn't it suspicious that this camera cannot record 720p. sony did everything but not that single thing? no way! i can bet that this option is hidden somewhere already! filip -->>> Not so sure about that Filip.... Sony has gone out of it's way to squash any intimation it will make HDV 720p camcorders.....and why should they. The fact that the European HD guidelines are caught up in the usual political wrangling will no doubt mean that 1080i broadcasts by broadcasters fed up with the insoluble impasse will commence somewhere in Europe, forcing the hand of the bureaucrats. Besides, if they don't, it'll be nice to sit back and watch 1080i as I do now, and know that on the other side of the World they're only watching 720p. Shouldn't the consumers of Europe be lobbying for the highest possible level of HD delivery, rather than hoping for a manufacturer to lower their hardware standard to match the poor decision making of a disfunctional legislature? As much as what I've said above is semi-serious, it's also obvious that the conversion to 720p would be done by the broadcaster, just as they convert to and from all the available HD/SD digital interlaced and progressive formats at the moment. Further, I think you'll find that any HDTVs available in Europe will be 1080/720/576/480 PAL/NTSC capable just as they are here in PAL based Australia, so viewing FX-1e 1080i 50fps material wouldn't present a problem regardless of the EBU's decision either way....

January 2nd, 2005, 04:11 PM	#14
David Kennett Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio Posts: 407	Jack, I initially edited my HD-10 HDV masterial with P3-900 laptop. Capturing is not the problem. If you can capture DV, then you can capture HDV (with the proper drivers-software of course). I captured with JVC pgm, then edited with JVC (KDDI) editor, then layed everything back to tape. It worked fine, except I was never able to see a smooth playback until it all went back to tape. __________________ Dave

January 3rd, 2005, 05:11 PM	#15
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	<<< it'll be nice to sit back and watch 1080i as I do now, and know that on the other side of the World they're only watching 720p. >>> Many people consider 720p to be a higher-quality format than 1080i, so don't be too glad that you're going to spend several more years (or decades) watching interlaced video. 720p at 60 frames per second would be the ideal solution, but it doesn't look like we're going to see that any time soon.