List of BD-players that play BD content on a DVD (red laser) [Archive]

View Full Version : List of BD-players that play BD content on a DVD (red laser)

Ghitulescu

4th April 2009, 16:08

I'll summarize here the result of a series of tests I've made over a few weeks. I wanted to buy a BD-player that can *really* do play DVD with BD content. At least until the price for BD-R will fall down.;)
The complete submissions are here:
1. http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1266385#post1266385
2. http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1266387#post1266387
3. http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1266393#post1266393
4. http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1266417#post1266417
5. http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1269603#post1269603

So I went "hunting" an original BD that would fit the size of a DVD, with no modifications. And I burned it on a DVD, using UDS2.50 or UDF2.60 (reports are that Matsushita PC-BD-Burners use UDF2.60), with and without a CERTIFICATE folder, with and without an AUXDATA folder. The video codec was VC-1 (as Pioneer displayed the info).

Original (UDF.250, no CERTIFICATE, no AUXDATA)
Now the list:
:(
Panasonic - 30, 50, 35, 55, + 60, 80
Onkyo - 606 (Funai made upon Panasonic basis)
Yamaha - 2900 (Panasonic basis)
Denon - 1800, 2500, 3800 (all Funai made on Panasonic basis)
Sharp - 20 and 21
Loewe - (it's a Sharp 20)
JVC - NX-BD3 (it plays the FBI warning, but resets itself before reaching other items and it loops forever).
:)
Pioneer - 70, 71, 51, lx08, 91
Sony - 300, 500, 350, 550
Samsung - all models (about 5 or 6)
LG - all models (about 3)

USF 2.60
nothing changed ;)
UDF 2.50 + CERTIFICATE
nothing changed ;)
New gear tested on 02.01.2010 - only UDF2.50 + CERTIFICATE
:(
Denon DVD-1800BD
Funai B1M110
Harman-Kardon BDP10 - recognised the DVDR as Data disc, did not play its content even in File mode.
Panasonic DMP-BD60, BD80
Pioneer BDP-120
Samsung BD-P1580, BD-P1600, HT-BD1220, HT-BD1255R, HT-BD4610, HT-BD7200
:)
LG BD350, BD370, HB354
LG HR400 - probably :) (not connected to a TV)
Marantz BD7004N1B
Onkyo DV-BD507 - probably :) (not connected to a TV). Again a Funai clone
Philips BDP5000 - strange as it's a Samsung clone
Pioneer BCS-FS500 - probably :) (not connected to a TV, but sound came out)
Pioneer BDP-320
Pioneer LX03BD - it's an LX08BD
Pioneer LX-52 - probably :) (not connected to a TV)
Samsung BD-P2500 - :)
Sony BDP-S360, BDP-S5000ES, BDP-S550, BDV-IT1000, BDV-Z7
All Sonies recognised the real type of the DVDR (eg DVD+R for all DVD+Rs since I always burn them as DVD-ROM).

UDF 2.50 + AUXDATA (and BACKUP/AUXDATA)
Nothing changed with the players that already played the disc (;)). I had access only to Pioneer, Sony, Samsung. No LG this time.
The Denons (1800, 2500) accepted the disc and played it as normal. :)
Panasonic 80, Yamaha and Loewe (Sharp) did not play it.
I could not check the Onkyo model as it was unconnected. The same went with Marantz.
The JVC loaded the disc and played a while then it ejected the disc (was not connected to a TV so I had no input).

---===---

All the players are EU models, those currently sold in Germany (Saturn, Mediamarkt, Conrad).
Since most of them were not connected to a TV I could not watch the messages they might give. However, the mere indication of "PLAY 1 0:00:35" or similar was enough to see that it works or not.

I think Panasonic is doomed from this point of view (for VC-1). I assume the things are better with H.264 since Panasonic also manufactures HD-Camcorders (which are AVCHD). The ongoing test is mentioned here: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1267446#post1267446.

Ghitulescu

4th April 2009, 16:15

:(
Denon - 1800, 2500, 3800 (all Funai made on Panasonic basis)

UDF 2.50 + AUXDATA (and BACKUP/AUXDATA)
The Denons (1800, 2500) accepted the disc and played it as normal. :)
Panasonic 80, Yamaha and Loewe (Sharp) did not play it.

Therefore, since a Panasonic based player (Denon) was able to play the DVD (well, it has to have AUXDATA on it) and the Panasonic still refused it, then it's a limitation in firmware and not a limitation in hardware (Uniphier chip) as I thought initially.

laserfan

4th April 2009, 16:33

Thanks for the posts. I'd been thinking about getting a Panasonic in the future, but it looks instead like Pioneer becomes my first choice! :)

I already have the LG BH200 BD/HDDVD player and it plays everything, but it won't live forever... ;)

mariner

4th April 2009, 17:34

Ghitulescu

4th April 2009, 18:56

Greetings Ghitulescu.

Dean Kasabow has made AVCHD with 1920x1080/60P H264 video. Would you be kind enough to test it on the players at your disposal?

Many thanks and best regards.

http://rapidshare.com/files/216481549/AVCHD_sanyo.rar

H.264 shouldn't be a problem, because it's the standard codec for AVCHD.

It's the VC-1 which poses problems, mainly because Hollywood and Panasonic&Co think that you, as a dumb/stupid/idiot consumer, do not have access to a VC-1 codec, so any VC-1 DVD might be a pirated copy of a movie.

See, we are not supposed to do anything but what we are allowed (actually restricted) to do. It's a sort of Lego with very few pieces.

I think that in the end, the manufacturers that do not satisfy the customer will loose. Think about DivX. Now every Markenartikel (I don't know this in English) supports it (and DivX is 99.99% pirated movies, as they say).

I do not own any of these players. I want to buy one, actually I'm tending towards a Pio 51 or (if the price would be under 500€) a Denon 2500 (or 3800). My first choice would have been the 70A but it's gone for good.

On the other hand, I've asked the developers of free software NOT TO ADAPT their software to Panasonic, since most other players can do it with no changes. Probably Panasonic payed a lot for favourable recensions, since almost every Panasonic customer said me that his Panny is marginally better than say a Samsung but far inferior to a Denon or Pioneer. I'm talking here about DVD performance since HDTV is about the same (I mean you won't notice a difference between Pio 91 and Sharp 20 for BD, and it's 10:1 in price - at least to my eyes). Not to mention that several reports stated that the red laser of a Panny is prone to failures in short times. I was a Matsushita fan (in the good old times!), I am a Pio fan, and I hate Sony, but Sony has one class over Panny.

If you want full compatibility within a budget get a Sony. I'll have the Pio, maily because my TV is a Pio (compatibility issues).

If I'll have time I will test the file you sent. No guarantee tough. One more thing, Germany is in Europe and here we have PAL and 50Hz systems. If you're in one of NTSC countries (US, Japan etc.) maybe the players are different and the result is then irrelevant. Most of EU players (and TVs) can do NTSC, but I heard that very few NTSC players (and TVs) can do PAL. One vendor really told me that US players are so cheap compared to the ones in Europe is actually due to the fact that they cannot do multistandard.

mariner

4th April 2009, 19:28

Thanks for the reply. You are doing a great service and all of us here appreciate that.

Dean's video is 60P, not the usual 60i. It's made from video taken with Sanyo HD 2000 camcorder. It will be an interesting test result.

Many thanks and best regards.

deank

4th April 2009, 19:30

I removed the sample few days ago... may be I should upload another one?

mariner

4th April 2009, 19:32

That would be great.

Ghitulescu

5th April 2009, 08:42

I removed the sample few days ago... may be I should upload another one?

One thing:

one one hand the sample should be as small as possible, to speed up the download

one the other hand, it should be large enough for a player to accomodate it (remember DVD+RW case?)

turbojet

5th April 2009, 08:51

Ghitulescu

5th April 2009, 09:56

Before people get confused this list doesn't fit BD-RB output, only Sony, Denon 3800 and I possibly LG730 (waiting for reply) support those.

What I don't get is why the HQV dvd used for this test, which has an HDMV plays on most players but HDMV menu from BD-RB doesn't. Maybe next step to find out?

Also is converting BDJ to HDMV menus a possibility?

Yes, this is a list with BD players that can play BD-content on a DVD (red laser), in this case the HQV HD Benchmark, since it's the only one I have.

You guys there should have a close look at this BD/DVD (it's still available) and draw the right conclusions.

I never used BD-RB, TsRemux, tsMuxer or any other software, so I cannot yet check every case. I do not own yet a BD player, nor do I have BD discs.

Unfortunately, the BD specifications are still not public and will never be, like those of DVD, and people must "reverse engineer" them, which seems to be somehow illegal in some countries (like in the US under DMCA). So it will take some years of experiments until a partial knowledge will be available (at least for authoring simple menu-driven discs). Good luck!

turbojet

5th April 2009, 10:15

I think the secret is in the 2 .bdmv files, I don't have any idea where to start understanding them.

deank seems to know enough as his tool multiAVCHD outputs disks with menus that have no issues on players that have issues with BD-RB.

Unfortunately I don't think it will be fixed until someone comes along with enough knowledge of the bdmv files, owns a player that has issues, and has time to work on it.

deank

5th April 2009, 10:30

turbojet

5th April 2009, 10:52

Outside of other issues do you think editing the original bdmv files (what BD-RB uses) in such a way would allow the current players with issues to at least make it to a menu?

Does the PIP issue involve anything outside of an occasional extra? like menus?

Do you mean BDJ to HDMV could never be done with set code?

deank

5th April 2009, 11:01

May be it is possible to somehow edit bdmv files... The PIP was just an example of navigation-command ignored... and it is a functionality that roman added in tsmuxer after a request of mine to overcome the cropped-video problem and center it while playback. I don't know what other nav-commands are ignored, too.

HDMV is really limited programming interface compared to BD-J and I doubt anyone can create a tool to make a conversion without user/programmer intervention.

Ghitulescu

5th April 2009, 11:05

It is not just the bdmv files... There really is some limitation when it comes to DVD media and/or AVCHD.

For example BD players seem to ignore certain commands in movieobject.bdmv when using the red-laser mode. For example my PS3 won't execute 'setsecondarystream' and won't show PIP window if content is on DVD and recognized as AVCHD. On the other hand if index.bdmv is changed to Blu-ray - PS3 won't accept the disc at all, but PC players show the PIP properly...

I believe there are hardware/firmware limitations that we cannot overcome simply by changing 'things' in bdmv. And about your question in another thread - no, there is no way to convert java menus to hdmv. They can be re-written by a programmer from scratch, but not auto-converted.

I think you're right. There are two different modi, and I think that the firmware programmers have to take into account the physical limitations of the media (CDR is slower than DVDR, in turn DVDR is slower than BD/BDR). Since today we cut corners, it's easier to invalidate a block of features than to selectively process them. Plus the legal requirements that come on top ;)

Besides PS3 is not a BD-player but a BD play-enabled game-console , to promote the BD format. Since it's "re"programmable, unlike the regular players, PS3 should not be used in testing BD movies. My opinion ...

deank

5th April 2009, 11:09

turbojet

5th April 2009, 11:20

Plus PS3 is by far the most popular BD player currently.
Lower BD SAP prices will change this eventually.

I do agree it's not the greatest testing rig for retail menus on DVD5/9 though especially a PAL PS3 which seems to play menus that even the NTSC PS3's don't.
The pickiest player such as Samsung 1600 would be optimal, although it may be limited so much as that it won't play anything. Maybe the Panasonic BD60 or Samsung 1500 would be a better tester.

Ghitulescu

5th April 2009, 15:29

Well, PS3 is BD player - it is not some weird hybrid. It is a game console, but the bdplayer part is a standard one. FW updates are possible for all BD players.

Moreover PS3 supports the latest profile 2.0 Bd-Live... something missing in many SAPs.

Don't take it personally, it was not what I've said.

I was thinking of a sort of PC + WinDVD BD on it. PS3 is in fact a sort of PC (different architecture though) and there is a hard+soft implementation of BD. PS3 does not have a dedicated chip for BD as SAPs do, this is what I meant, one can reprogram it (entierely software) whenever it might be the need for. This versatility is what I contest for a testing device. One cannot use a "changeable" device for testing, because one cannot compare the tests!

Again, the most pickier devices I've met in my life were the Toshibas. They were absolute conform to standards. That's why I was using a SCSI CDROM from Toshiba for testing the burned CD (years ago :)) and a SCSI DVDROM for DVDs. Too bad Toshiba does not manufacture BD-players or readers.

deank

5th April 2009, 15:40

:) I don't take it personally... I think I made a great choice buying a PS3 few years ago, as it proves to be a good player to a lot of different content. The exception is with these DVDs with BD content.

I think it would've been a waste of $$ and space on PS3's MB to add a chip specifically for BD playback. After all BD playback is just mix of reading BD discs - program segments to handle its contents - visualisation. It is all programs stored in FW - be it PS3's one or SAP's. Sony is a licensee so no need to pay for someone's chip with BD caps nor use its own chips (designated for Sony SAPs).

A bad thing in PS3 is that any FW update may disable/screw things we now enjoy (as the relaxed AVCHD support) and with a SAP you may never update your FW if all is okay.

But we're getting out of topic. PS3 has limitations (as of this moment) when playing (officially unsupported) BD content written in AVCHD structures on a DVD disc.

Albion

5th April 2009, 16:09

Having recently decided to dispense with my Panasonic Blu-ray player because of the problems inherent in this thread,I have now acquired a Sony s350.

I am pleased that because of some of the testing here by forum members ( I have done some of my own) I am able to play DVD-R DVD+R D/L with HD Content using the Blu-ray structure provided by TSmuxer or TSRemuxer.It is then burnt with Nero.

One problem remains,and although I think I know why,it would be nice to have it confirmed.

The above disks are recognised as AVCHD although the display clearly recognises if the source is VC-1 etc.Now as the spec for AVCHD is 24mbps then any bitrate over this amount will result in stuttering.Unless that is we use Rebuilder or Ripbot to re-encode.

This seems to be my observation.For example I have just put the sprawling "How the West was Won" on 4 DVD+R D/L disks.
It plays quite happily on my PC Blu-ray Drive,but stutters repeateadly in the Sony s350.The bitrate at times ranges from over 24 to 34 mbps.On HD-DVD VC-1 titles converted to the Blu-ray structure like "Grand Prix" for example the highest bitrate is about 22 mbps.Hence no stuttering.

This I assume is the reason.Is anyone else playing these heavy bitrate titles on DVD-R or DVD D/L without having to re-encode.:)

turbojet

6th April 2009, 16:14

It's because of the 3x read speed limit of DVD's, which is 30-34 mbps (conflicting info on the internet) for more than a second, you also have to consider the audio and sub streams.

I don't know of any way to work around this.

Albion

6th April 2009, 19:09

Thanks Turbo,the DVD speed is certainly something I've heard before,but I am confused about why a PC Drive can cope with the high level bitrate,whilst a dedicated Blu-ray player can't.

I presume this is something more than the PC's greater processing power.

As you say,its often implied that simply by producing multiple BD5's or 9s to maintain quality,they will play straightforwardly on a Blu-ray player.Clearly they won't,without further processing ie re-encoding.

Despite the fact that the High Def war is over,all the HD-DVD's I have converted to multiple DVD's play perfectly.
Are these very high bitrates on Blu-ray necessary to maintain quality.If users of RipBot and BD Rebuilder is anything to go by maybe not.:thanks:

SeeMoreDigital

6th April 2009, 20:23

Thanks Turbo,the DVD speed is certainly something I've heard before,but I am confused about why a PC Drive can cope with the high level bitrate,whilst a dedicated Blu-ray player can't.Over the years, I've performed bit-rate speed tests on a dozen or-so high-def capable DVD stand-alone players. The DVD read speed typically maxes-out at around 30Mbps.... At that speed the DVD drive is "very noisy" :eek:

Ghitulescu

7th April 2009, 17:16

Thanks Turbo,the DVD speed is certainly something I've heard before,but I am confused about why a PC Drive can cope with the high level bitrate,whilst a dedicated Blu-ray player can't.

Has nothing to do with processing power.

A PC drive and an audio/video drive are different (ok, they use now PC drives in standalones ;).

A PC "can wait", if data is not read in time, the drive will rotate once more and get it. Or if the CD - DVD - BD is scratched.

An audio - video drive should give a constant flow of data IN REAL TIME. That's 1x. If they are far too speedy (more than say 6x) then they will spin the disc faster, generating noise and heat and shortening the drive's service life, with no immediate advantage. I was betting on 2x, but since many people say 3x, be it 3x.

So dedicated drives are slower but better.

Albion

11th April 2009, 13:13

Ghitulescu

11th April 2009, 15:20

Many thanks for the replies.I'm still not sure I understand why a PC plays high bitrates off a DVD-R and dedicated players don't.In laymans terms I'll just assume the data is handled differently.

Anyway I have recently used the X264 codec through RipBot and although processing takes a while I am amazed at the imperceptible difference when reducing to a BD9,and this at 720 not 1080.

What I generally do is split the original BD to 3 or 4 files (that's about 35-45mins a file) and then re-encode to a DVD-R at 720 using Ripbot.Totally stunning.

I'm reluctant to downsample to 720p (well, even if it's backed up by JVC and it's *the* HDTV* in Europe as EBU says). To my knowledge, only 3 TV models are *natively* capable of displaying 720p, 2 of them from Panasonic.

Well, why downsample to 720p if your TV does 1080p? You do 2 scalings (1080->720->1080 or 768 or whatever your TV may have). Yes, I agree, it's better than DVD, but remember, one day BDR will be 0.50€ apiece, like CDs or DVDs today. And that day you will be sorry. I remember my *lost* days when I encoded AVIs from net into VCDs (that were the times), now I own the original DVDs for a ridiculous amount. The hours spent on AVI->VCD/DVD almost cost my marriage. So be clever... Try to keep the original as closest as possible...

On the other hand, I'll be glad to use a DVD9 (BD9) for a BD25, even if a DVD9 is still expensive here in Europe (3-4€ apiece), and still prone to errors (well, more difficult to burn and even more ready to fail).

Before someone says, No, I've burned 1000 DVDR-DL with no errors at all, let's say that I'm checking the every burned DVD with Plextools and everything having more than 2 POE (or more than 50 PIE) is already a problem (since 4 POE is the maximum, or 280 PIE). If you don't believe me now, we'll talk in 2 years. I burn optical media for 12 years now and NO CD/DVD has me failed due to bad burning till now. Not a single one. My 12 years old CDRs are still better than most people obtain today.

So, I would prefer a nice re-encoding to BD9 in 1080p than one in 720p. That's in theory, since I have first to do some tests.

Albion

11th April 2009, 17:32

I'm reluctant to downsample to 720p (well, even if it's backed up by JVC and it's *the* HDTV* in Europe as EBU says). To my knowledge, only 3 TV models are *natively* capable of displaying 720p, 2 of them from Panasonic.

Well, why downsample to 720p if your TV does 1080p? You do 2 scalings (1080->720->1080 or 768 or whatever your TV may have). Yes, I agree, it's better than DVD, but remember, one day BDR will be 0.50€ apiece, like CDs or DVDs today. And that day you will be sorry. I remember my *lost* days when I encoded AVIs from net into VCDs (that were the times), now I own the original DVDs for a ridiculous amount. The hours spent on AVI->VCD/DVD almost cost my marriage. So be clever... Try to keep the original as closest as possible...

On the other hand, I'll be glad to use a DVD9 (BD9) for a BD25, even if a DVD9 is still expensive here in Europe (3-4€ apiece), and still prone to errors (well, more difficult to burn and even more ready to fail).

Before someone says, No, I've burned 1000 DVDR-DL with no errors at all, let's say that I'm checking the every burned DVD with Plextools and everything having more than 2 POE (or more than 50 PIE) is already a problem (since 4 POE is the maximum, or 280 PIE). If you don't believe me now, we'll talk in 2 years. I burn optical media for 12 years now and NO CD/DVD has me failed due to bad burning till now. Not a single one. My 12 years old CDRs are still better than most people obtain today.

So, I would prefer a nice re-encoding to BD9 in 1080p than one in 720p. That's in theory, since I have first to do some tests.

Well I only have a 19in monitor and a 37in HD Ready LCD at present.I am happy with what I get,and I am very critical of picture quality.
Fortunately sound is not a problem for me,bog standard Dolby Digital is plenty good enough.
However I see the clear points you are making.What I didn't mention was that I generally back up a full BD to 3/4 D/L then only convert to AVCHD 720 on those D/L disks that stutter due to high bitrate on the Blu-ray player.

Later on I will still be able to obtain full quality when I do get a 1080 display and those BD-R disks are much cheaper.

Ghitulescu

29th April 2009, 09:25

I did another test, this time with a self-made BD5 containing h.264 video.

I've got an MKV file off a Spanish server (which is fully legal, ask your attorney - s/he's paid to know this :)), ran it through TsMuxer and had already a problem, the result was bigger than the original although one audio track was taken out -> http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=146603.

Since no DVD+/-RW DL exist, at least to my knowledge, I had to trim the end just to see if it works. Well, it didn't, at least not the video. I think that's related to B-pyramids - well, Pioneer seems not to decode this.

I took then the original MKV file, ran it again through TsMuxer, but to demux only. I've encoded the video part using the BD profile (with small changes to suit my source) of a professional encoder - just to be sure that 100% BD compliance will be attained. After 16 hours (oh, God!), I've remuxed again the whole thing in TsMuxer to BD output (the log said now nothing about B-pyramids) and burned the BDMV folder with Nero (UDF2.50), the CERTIFICATE was not needed by my Pioneer -> http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=146134.

Now, some surprises.
Pio 51FD and 91 displayed the movie with short pauses every 2 seconds. The second run (and the next ones) on my Pio 51FD (1.17, EU) ran just perfect. Is it the VBV value (->http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=145917), or the max bitrate (->http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=146414, http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=145917), I don't know. Denon, Yamaha, even yes Panasonic, displayed it as it was supposed to be. Sony 350 had a problem with it. Only the Samsung 1600 refused to play it.

Conclusions:
BD5 with h.264 and AC3 as obtained by TsMuxer are compatible to almost everything, except for Samsung 1600 (that's the answer for @DK also).
B-pyramids seems to be a problem for Pio series.
DVD transfer rates should be taken into account when authoring/encoding a BD5/9 - experiments should be performed, because each player is different.

I can only assume that the drive in Pio needs some improvements, since it was noticeably louder than usual. Average bitrate was 6299kbps, max (according to Pio) was 19,90Mbps but for split seconds - and pauses occured also in "quiet" passages (less than 1Mbps, according to Pio).

turbojet

29th April 2009, 18:23

That's TSMuxer.

What's the resolution and reference frames with and without b-pyramid?

29th April 2009, 19:13

The playback problem with my Samsung 1600 and BD-9 material burned to DVD+DL was solved in a different way: as opposed to most other players and even Samsung's1500, 2500 and 4610 the 1600 does NOT accept DVD-ROM as booktyp.

As soon as I used +R for the booktype setting the 1600 played all media fine (movie only bd-9 output from bd-rebuilder).

Ghitulescu

3rd May 2009, 16:24

That's TSMuxer.

What's the resolution and reference frames with and without b-pyramid?

That's correct, TsMuxer was used.

The resolution, as it may be known now from my posts, was/is/will be 1080p. Both movies (I'm trying a new one) have 1440 pixels for horizontal and 1080 for vertical.

For the first muxing TsMuxer said something about B-pyramids, after reencoding it s said nix, so I assumed no B-pyramids were present.

How to check reference frames?

turbojet

4th May 2009, 00:42

mediainfo in text view check the encoding settings line it should have --ref and if it was used --b-pyramid

At 1440x1080 the maximum BD players can handle is --ref 4

Ghitulescu

5th May 2009, 14:19

mediainfo in text view check the encoding settings line it should have --ref and if it was used --b-pyramid

At 1440x1080 the maximum BD players can handle is --ref 4 and no b-pyramid or --ref 3 and --b-pyramid

Here's the log of the second MKV file:

Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L5.1
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 8 frames
Muxing mode : Container profile=Unknown@5.1
Codec ID : V_MPEG4/ISO/AVC
Duration : 39mn 54s
Bit rate : 9 289 Kbps
Nominal bit rate : 9 500 Kbps
Width : 1 440 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16/9
Frame rate : 23.976 fps
Resolution : 24 bits
Colorimetry : 4:2:0
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.249
Stream size : 2.59 GiB (86%)
Title : Vídeo 1080p x264 @ 9500 Kbps
Writing library : x264 core 56 svn-675C
Encoding settings : cabac=1 / ref=5 / deblock=1:-2:-1 / analyse=0x3:0x113 / me=umh / subme=6 / brdo=1 / mixed_ref=1 / me_range=16 / chroma_me=1 / trellis=1 / 8x8dct=1 / cqm=0 / deadzone=21,11 / chroma_qp_offset=0 / threads=2 / nr=0 / decimate=1 / mbaff=0 / bframes=3 / b_pyramid=1 / b_adapt=1 / b_bias=0 / direct=3 / wpredb=1 / bime=1 / keyint=250 / keyint_min=25 / scenecut=40(pre) / rc=2pass / bitrate=9500 / ratetol=1.0 / rceq='blurCplx^(1-qComp)' / qcomp=0.60 / qpmin=10 / qpmax=51 / qpstep=4 / cplxblur=20.0 / qblur=0.5 / ip_ratio=1.40 / pb_ratio=1.30

It appears that -ref is 5 and b-pyramid is 1 (probably on). Is there any chance to modify any of these without reencoding. I know B-pyramids needs reencoding, but maybe other things ...

turbojet

5th May 2009, 14:38

Actually I learned yesterday that b-pyramid no longer requires -1 ref for standalone compatibility in x264.
You can change num_ref_frames with h264info (http://sourceforge.net/project/downloading.php?group_id=138139&filename=h264info_alpha0026.zip&a=94952289) but it will skip when 5 reference frames are used. It may or may not enable a player to play it.

Ghitulescu

2nd January 2010, 14:06

Tu summarize the facts presented by me in various threads, the only universal players are (02.01.2010):
LG BD350, HB354,
Marantz BD7004N1B
Philips BDP5000
Pioneer BDP-51FD (probabil 71 too), BDP-LX03/08, BDP-LX52,
Sony BDP-S360, BDP-S550, BDV-IT1000, BDV-Z7

In a close call (as not all tests could be carried out but no reason to the contrary)
Pio BDP-LX71, -LX70/A, BDP-320, BCS-FS500
All Sonies
LG HR400,
Denon DVD1800BD - well, in the beginning passed the VC-1, now it failed (firmware upgrade?)
Onkyo DV-BD507
Denon 2500BT - well, I think this is better than 1800BD but not available for tests 2 and 3.

Test material:
1. VC-1 disk (BD-ROM copy) - http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1269616#post1269616
2a. ARTE HD disk (SAT HDTV origin) - http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1358021#post1358021
2b. ASTRA HD disk (SAT HDTV origin)
2a normally contained H.264 video with 720p50 and REF=2, one track had also REF=5 (only the Sonies could play it)
2b normally is H.264 with 1920x1088i - it caused many playback problems (only the Sonies could play it)
3. BD-5 containing H.264 video encoded with Procoder having BD profile and using tsmuxer BD output.

-=-=-=-=-

Many players, including the Pannies, Sharp 21, yamaha and other did actually passed test 3. Notably no Samsung could pass test 3 (maybe that Booktype issue?).

-=-=-=-=-

As you can see, except for LGs, notably almost every high end gear played all 3 disks.