What do I need to use .m2t files? at DVinfo.net

Les Hamilton · May 2nd, 2008, 11:09 AM

I new to this. I'm running Vegas Platinum. I just downloaded a short .m2t file. When I try to play it it's jerky. I'm using a 2.4ghz machine with one gig of memory. Do I need more memory or am I going to have to buy a faster machine? I hope not the latter since my budget is limited.

Mike Kujbida · May 2nd, 2008, 11:23 AM

Sorry Les but, according to the Sony site, a 2.8 GHz processor is recommended for HDV :-(

Melvin Torrens · May 2nd, 2008, 12:31 PM

I have an old PC that I rarely use, it has a 2.2GHz processor and 2GB RAM, I'm able to edit HDV just fine with Vegas, I'm running a tweaked version of XP so that might be the reason it still runs smoothly... But I would try to clear out any useless processes running in the background and see if it get's any better.

Mark Birkedal · May 3rd, 2008, 12:14 AM

Les, I'd have to ask what you're trying to do with the file. If you're watching it from the video track timeline, how jerky it is depends on the preview quality setting you're using. The lower the quality the smoother or higher fps the playback will be.

Mark

Alex Thames · May 3rd, 2008, 12:54 AM

I have a 2.4ghz Quad Core Intel Q6600 and it plays .m2t back fine, even hour long .m2t files.

Jeremiah Rickert · May 3rd, 2008, 01:50 AM

Vegas isn't designed to utilize multiple processors for playback...even my Quad Core qx9650 starts to choke on BEST (FULL), especially when fx and such start to roll.

At least it renders like a champ using all 4 cores.

I can't wait for the 64bit version of Vegas Pro this fall.

John Miller · May 3rd, 2008, 08:37 AM

If you are trying to play .m2t files (rather than preview within Vegas etc), try the free VLC (http://www.videolan.org). It's very lightweight. I even use it for capture instead of Vegas sometimes because Vegas can't give you a full screen preview of what's being captured.

Rob Wood · May 3rd, 2008, 09:43 AM

More memory imo. Two gig.

My older computer is a 2.0ghz CPU (we're talking single-cpu, no dual/quad/whatever). Video data is on a separate disk from my OS/apps (not a partition, a different drive) and 2 gig of RAM. I monitor at half-rez Preview mode and have no stuttering of playback. That includes having Video Scopes running in realtime (without 'em the fps will be better)

CAVEATS
1) Playback is not jerky but does not hit full frame-rate on my system (approx 10-15fps steady using draft or preview... half-rez best-mode is only 8fps). If the clip is short and Vegas can cache it, fps will increase after a number of repeats to full fps.
2) Anything other than straightforward cutting sucks, tho I have done complex FX filtering using it... it was very very slow (1 frame every few seconds).
3) If you find HDV editing is something you end up doing more than once-in-a-while, you'll probably be looking for a new system within a year anyway.

~

Having more than two gig RAM wouldn't hurt but you'd be into diminishing returns. Better to save for a new computer.

good luck
rob

Les Hamilton · May 3rd, 2008, 02:55 PM

Thanks for the replies. Let's see here. Yes, I'm am trying to play it back in preview from the track timeline. Changing the preview settings didn't change anything. and yes, the goal is to do heavy editing of HDV in the future.

From what I see here a memory upgrade might be worth a shot. I came across 4 gigs on Ebay that are specifically for my machine. If no one bids against me I'll get them for very cheap. It'll be a worth while upgrade in any case.

Oh and yes I tried the file on my VLC. It played back perfect. Nice little player.

Rick Diaz · May 3rd, 2008, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Les Hamilton

and yes, the goal is to do heavy editing of HDV in the future.

From what I see here a memory upgrade might be worth a shot.

Les, your first statement above should lead you to consider upgrading your computer. You are barely at the minimum for video editing alone, much less HD. You may notice some imporvement from a RAM upgrade, but once you start adding more and more clips to the timeline you'll be right back where you started. And when you finally get to outputting your videos you'll find that a huge render time to running time ratio will leave you very frustrated. Do yourself a favor and start looking towards a new computer. As your projects and editing skills grow in complexity you'll thank yourself.

David Lu · May 3rd, 2008, 04:45 PM

2.4Ghz single, dual, quad core? If you're looking at doing heavy HDV editing, perhaps you should consider Cineform NEO HDV. It takes a load off your processor, although you'll need ample disk space (say... 50-60GB per hour of recording).

James Harring · May 4th, 2008, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Les Hamilton

I new to this. I'm running Vegas Platinum. I just downloaded a short .m2t file. When I try to play it it's jerky. I'm using a 2.4ghz machine with one gig of memory. Do I need more memory or am I going to have to buy a faster machine? I hope not the latter since my budget is limited.

Generally is an otherwise capable system is playing jerky footage it's due to another software process that is the root cause.

Some viruscanners can be too aggressive - Not to pick on Mcafee, but it can corrupt and Mcaffee will grab and hold in memory every single friggin file the PC uses to run and thread them all in a long que. I've seen otherwise whippin fast PC's slowed to crawl due to this. Uninstall the viruscanner and it's back to normal. I won't single out the viruscanner, as it could be other apps. Best bet is to turn off these with MSCONFIG in a temporary fashion and solwly re-enable them until you find the root cause.
NOTE: Viruscanners may not allow themselves to be disabled, so uninstallying may be ony way to check them, unless you're a geek like me.

Adam Letch · May 4th, 2008, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremiah Rickert

Vegas isn't designed to utilize multiple processors for playback...even my Quad Core qx9650 starts to choke on BEST (FULL), especially when fx and such start to roll.

At least it renders like a champ using all 4 cores.

I can't wait for the 64bit version of Vegas Pro this fall.

I hope I spelt baine right, anyways, this is one area this otherwise brilliant software really needs to mature. I play my MT2 files with VLC nice and smooth, no problems, and whether I'm using my Sony Vaio 2.2 Core duo with 2gigs of Ram, or my Q6600 desktop, I can't view full frame rate, even in a small preview window and lower quality settings.
This can only be in my uneducated opinion because Vegas does not use any GPU mpeg accelerations, so all these wonderful powerful machines with the most powerful graphics cards to enjoy your HD video don't mean jack until this is fixed. So I'm not even sure if 64bit will help here??
But this is only from the timeline, because if you use the auto preview when using explorer or project media bin, it plays full speed.

Adam

Stephen Eastwood · May 6th, 2008, 12:38 AM

Best option, use gearshift to make proxies and work on those in editing, than switch out later. My quad core systems handle the mt2 fine but the avchd slows it down, and in any case using the sd makes everything super fast and super smooth with tons of effects. Its much easier and less work to use SD proxies even when working on hd even when the HD works fine. And gearshift is very reasonable.

May 2nd, 2008, 11:09 AM	#1
Les Hamilton New Boot Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Crookston, MN Posts: 15	What do I need to use .m2t files? I new to this. I'm running Vegas Platinum. I just downloaded a short .m2t file. When I try to play it it's jerky. I'm using a 2.4ghz machine with one gig of memory. Do I need more memory or am I going to have to buy a faster machine? I hope not the latter since my budget is limited.

May 3rd, 2008, 09:43 AM	#8
Rob Wood Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 146	More memory imo. Two gig. My older computer is a 2.0ghz CPU (we're talking single-cpu, no dual/quad/whatever). Video data is on a separate disk from my OS/apps (not a partition, a different drive) and 2 gig of RAM. I monitor at half-rez Preview mode and have no stuttering of playback. That includes having Video Scopes running in realtime (without 'em the fps will be better) CAVEATS 1) Playback is not jerky but does not hit full frame-rate on my system (approx 10-15fps steady using draft or preview... half-rez best-mode is only 8fps). If the clip is short and Vegas can cache it, fps will increase after a number of repeats to full fps. 2) Anything other than straightforward cutting sucks, tho I have done complex FX filtering using it... it was very very slow (1 frame every few seconds). 3) If you find HDV editing is something you end up doing more than once-in-a-while, you'll probably be looking for a new system within a year anyway. ~ Having more than two gig RAM wouldn't hurt but you'd be into diminishing returns. Better to save for a new computer. good luck rob Last edited by Rob Wood; May 3rd, 2008 at 10:12 AM. Reason: updated after checking my older system

May 6th, 2008, 12:38 AM	#14
Stephen Eastwood Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Great Neck, NY Posts: 291	Best option, use gearshift to make proxies and work on those in editing, than switch out later. My quad core systems handle the mt2 fine but the avchd slows it down, and in any case using the sd makes everything super fast and super smooth with tons of effects. Its much easier and less work to use SD proxies even when working on hd even when the HD works fine. And gearshift is very reasonable. __________________ Stephen Eastwood http://www.StephenEastwood.com

May 2nd, 2008, 11:23 AM	#2
Mike Kujbida Inner Circle Join Date: May 2005 Location: Windsor, ON Canada Posts: 2,770	Sorry Les but, according to the Sony site, a 2.8 GHz processor is recommended for HDV :-(

May 2nd, 2008, 12:31 PM	#3
Melvin Torrens Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Spain Posts: 46	I have an old PC that I rarely use, it has a 2.2GHz processor and 2GB RAM, I'm able to edit HDV just fine with Vegas, I'm running a tweaked version of XP so that might be the reason it still runs smoothly... But I would try to clear out any useless processes running in the background and see if it get's any better.

May 3rd, 2008, 12:14 AM	#4
Mark Birkedal New Boot Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Mason City, IA Posts: 8	Les, I'd have to ask what you're trying to do with the file. If you're watching it from the video track timeline, how jerky it is depends on the preview quality setting you're using. The lower the quality the smoother or higher fps the playback will be. Mark

May 3rd, 2008, 12:54 AM	#5
Alex Thames Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: New York Posts: 508	I have a 2.4ghz Quad Core Intel Q6600 and it plays .m2t back fine, even hour long .m2t files.

May 3rd, 2008, 01:50 AM	#6
Jeremiah Rickert Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Newberg, Oregon Posts: 494	Vegas isn't designed to utilize multiple processors for playback...even my Quad Core qx9650 starts to choke on BEST (FULL), especially when fx and such start to roll. At least it renders like a champ using all 4 cores. I can't wait for the 64bit version of Vegas Pro this fall.

May 3rd, 2008, 08:37 AM	#7
John Miller Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Hillsborough, NC, USA Posts: 968	If you are trying to play .m2t files (rather than preview within Vegas etc), try the free VLC (http://www.videolan.org). It's very lightweight. I even use it for capture instead of Vegas sometimes because Vegas can't give you a full screen preview of what's being captured.

May 3rd, 2008, 02:55 PM	#9
Les Hamilton New Boot Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Crookston, MN Posts: 15	Thanks for the replies. Let's see here. Yes, I'm am trying to play it back in preview from the track timeline. Changing the preview settings didn't change anything. and yes, the goal is to do heavy editing of HDV in the future. From what I see here a memory upgrade might be worth a shot. I came across 4 gigs on Ebay that are specifically for my machine. If no one bids against me I'll get them for very cheap. It'll be a worth while upgrade in any case. Oh and yes I tried the file on my VLC. It played back perfect. Nice little player.

May 3rd, 2008, 04:45 PM	#11
David Lu Tourist Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 3	2.4Ghz single, dual, quad core? If you're looking at doing heavy HDV editing, perhaps you should consider Cineform NEO HDV. It takes a load off your processor, although you'll need ample disk space (say... 50-60GB per hour of recording).