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.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > New and alternative a/v containers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 9th October 2017, 12:24   #22261  |  Link
Mikounou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 3
Hello,

I have a problem with the lavfilters:
I can't bitstream DTS-HD HRA.

My reveiver (Onkyo RZ900) display only DTS but no sound.

No problem with other (Dolby Digital +, TrueHD, DTS or DTS-HD MA, DTS:X).

Even with latest nighly builds, same error...

I have tested many things, change all options in Lav Filters, but no luck

I am forced to uncheck each time the bitstream to activate the PCM conversion...

On some forums, they talk about a problem in the DTS header that would not be recognized on some amp.
Apparently when playing a DTS HD MA before the HRA track, the bitsream would work well (I did not manage to test)

Can you help me ? I have many BD with DTS-HD HRA tracks...

Thanks in advance

My config :
Windows 10 (latest update)
NVIDIA GTX 1070 (latest NVIDIA drivers)
Onkyo TX-RZ900 (latest firmware)
Latest MPC HC (nightly build)
Mikounou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2017, 12:34   #22262  |  Link
varekai
Registered User
 
varekai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 278
LAVfilters two versions?

Is it possible to have two versions installed?
I use BD-RB which requires LAVfilters 0.65 for avoiding audio sync issues.
Would like to use LAVfilters 0.70.2
varekai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2017, 12:53   #22263  |  Link
sneaker_ger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,607
What player do you use? MPC-HC comes with an internal LAV version.


(I know BD-RB users seem to stick to certain versions but I doubt using the latest will actually pose any problems.)
sneaker_ger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2017, 13:28   #22264  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 8,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by varekai View Post
Is it possible to have two versions installed?
No. DirectShow filters are registered in the system and as such only one can be installed/registered.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2017, 13:55   #22265  |  Link
mzso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 677
Quote:
Originally Posted by varekai View Post
Is it possible to have two versions installed?
I use BD-RB which requires LAVfilters 0.65 for avoiding audio sync issues.
Would like to use LAVfilters 0.70.2
I tried doing this via registry tinkering for other reasons, but it failed. (LAV didn't load)
So I guess you need to compile your own version with a changed identifier/name from the 0.65 source.
mzso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2017, 14:39   #22266  |  Link
varekai
Registered User
 
varekai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 278
@sneaker_ger
@nevcairiel
@mzso

OK, thanks for the info, appreciate it!
I use both MPC-HC and PotPlayer with madVR.
Compile my own version is way over my skills...
Gonna do some BD-RB testing with 0.70.2 installed.
varekai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th October 2017, 15:08   #22267  |  Link
aufkrawall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by aufkrawall View Post
I notice some weird behavior with D3D11VA copyback: It roughly has twice as high CPU usage as DXVA2 copyback.
With EVR in MPC HC, this is just ~2% vs. ~4% CPU usage, but with madVR, it's ~6% vs ~12% (4k 50fps HEVC 10 bit video).
I noticed something similar with mpv.
Is D3D11VA somehow not as well suited as DXVA2 for copyback?
aufkrawall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2017, 18:57   #22268  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,051
Guys can I get a recommendation as to the best way to downmix content to 2.0 output. My cheap 5.1 system gave out on me so I have gotten a set of LS50 Wireless and plan to attach a sub to its sub output, as I normally don't really make a lot of use of the surround information anyways.

I'm wondering whats the consensus on the best way to downmix the likes of 5.1 to 2.0 without losing any of the LFE information. I want to send the full range of output to the speakers and decide from there how best to transfer the lower frequency content.

I have windows speaker configuration set to 2.0 and set that I have full range speakers (not that I think it even has any impact). I'm not sure which is best, to let windows mix whatever I throw at it, ie 5.1, down to 2.0, or use lav audios mixing to convert the 5.1 to 2.0. I know a lot of people use wasapi to try to avoid the windows mixer as its so bad. Is this still the case nowadays in Windows 10 and is using lav audio mixing + wasapi out from mpc still the best way to go?

Note: Whats throwing me off about bypassing lav audio decoder and just using mpc audio renderer, set to exclusive wasapi, is that the lfe channel in any surround sound test clips I have tried from say Dolby, still seems to be getting mixed into the 2.0.

Last edited by mark0077; 10th October 2017 at 19:08.
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2017, 19:43   #22269  |  Link
e-t172
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
I'm wondering whats the consensus on the best way to downmix the likes of 5.1 to 2.0 without losing any of the LFE information. I want to send the full range of output to the speakers and decide from there how best to transfer the lower frequency content.
I don't know about the "consensus", but for me personally, I use the LAV Audio mixer with LFE set to 1.58 (=+4 dB, because ITU BS.775 LFE +10dB + two channels -6dB). That's the proper way to do it if you truly have a system that is capable of handling the full LFE output without overloading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
I have windows speaker configuration set to 2.0 and set that I have full range speakers (not that I think it even has any impact).
It doesn't. I have yet to find a scenario in which the "full range" setting in the Windows audio properties has any measurable effect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
I'm not sure which is best, to let windows mix whatever I throw at it, ie 5.1, down to 2.0, or use lav audios mixing to convert the 5.1 to 2.0.
I have measured the downmix coefficients that the Windows audio engine uses to downmix 5.1 to stereo. They are (for the left channel):

L = (L + -3dB*C + -10dB*LFE + -1dB*SL + -8dB*SR) * -10dB

These are weird coefficients that don't match the ITU BS.775 recommendation. I don't know why Microsoft decided to use these coefficients; maybe they're following different advice. As far as I know BS.775 is the standard to follow, which makes these coefficients wrong. This is the main reason why I use the LAV Audio mixer to downmix, not the Windows mixer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
I know a lot of people use wasapi to try to avoid the windows mixer as its so bad.
The Windows mixer is not "bad". Aside from the differences in downmixing coefficients that I've described above, you would be hard-pressed to find any perceivable difference in audio quality. Aside from very specific cases, most people who use WASAPI use it for dubious reasons (typically, an overparanoid obsession about getting "bit-perfect" output).

(The only case I know of where the Windows audio pipeline would degrade quality in perceivable ways is back in the days of Windows XP, where IIRC people had legitimate complains about the resampler not being good enough. The pipeline was completely revamped in Vista.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
Note: Whats throwing me off about bypassing lav audio decoder and just using mpc audio renderer, set to exclusive wasapi, is that the lfe channel in any surround sound test clips I have tried from say Dolby, still seems to be getting mixed into the 2.0.
I'm not sure what the problem is. If your sub is capable of handling it, then LFE should be included in the 2.0 downmix.
e-t172 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2017, 19:56   #22270  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,051
Wow thanks for the replies e-t172, very informative. My only worry about LFE being detectable when using mpc audio renderer set to exclusive wasapi (lav mixer disabled), was that I thought in that case there was no mixer whatsoever involved, so I'm just confused as to whats mixing the LFE into the 2 channels in that particular case. Maybe its mpc renderer itself in this case (although i don't have it set to mix channels at all). I just want to know what pieces of software are involved in the various combinations. I'll use your approach of using lav audio to downmix and I'll use 0.71, 0.71 and 1.58 as recommended.

My main reason for trying to use wasapi in various cases (winamp / mpc) is so that I can play a mix of say 44.1khz and 48khz content, and my understanding is with wasapi there should be no conversion, where as without it, the mixer is converting to whatever I have set in windows sound settings.

Thanks again.

Last edited by mark0077; 10th October 2017 at 19:58.
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2017, 20:32   #22271  |  Link
el Filou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by e-t172 View Post
I have yet to find a scenario in which the "full range" setting in the Windows audio properties has any measurable effect.
It's used by the "Bass Management" feature available in the Enhancements tab in Windows' sound control panel.
__________________
HTPC: E7400, GeForce 1050 Ti, DVB-C TV, Panasonic GT60 | Desktop: 4690K, Radeon 7870, Dell U2713HM | Windows 1703, MediaPortal/MPC-HC, LAV Filters, ReClock, madVR | Laptop: i5-2520m, Windows Insider
el Filou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2017, 20:32   #22272  |  Link
e-t172
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
My only worry about LFE being detectable when using mpc audio renderer set to exclusive wasapi (lav mixer disabled), was that I thought in that case there was no mixer whatsoever involved, so I'm just confused as to whats mixing the LFE into the 2 channels in that particular case.

Maybe its mpc renderer itself in this case (although i don't have it set to mix channels at all). I just want to know what pieces of software are involved in the various combinations.
If you're playing 5.1 content using WASAPI Exclusive and a 2.0 output, and playback works (i.e. it doesn't fail to start), then something has to have downmixed it in some way. In WASAPI Exclusive Windows will not downmix; if an application tries to open an audio device in exclusive mode and the channel count doesn't match, Windows simply refuses to comply. LAV Audio will not downmix if you don't tell it to, so that indeed only leaves the MPC Audio Renderer as the only remaining step in the pipeline that could possibly have downmixed the audio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
My main reason for trying to use wasapi in various cases (winamp / mpc) is so that I can play a mix of say 44.1khz and 48khz content, and my understanding is with wasapi there should be no conversion, where as without it, the mixer is converting to whatever I have set in windows sound settings.
That's technically true, but I wouldn't bother. No-one can tell the difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by el Filou View Post
It's used by the "Bass Management" feature available in the Enhancements tab in Windows' sound control panel.
Ah, that makes sense. I never used Windows Bass Management settings, so that explains why I couldn't tell what this option was for.

Last edited by e-t172; 10th October 2017 at 20:34.
e-t172 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2017, 07:31   #22273  |  Link
mogli
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by e-t172 View Post
I have measured the downmix coefficients that the Windows audio engine uses to downmix 5.1 to stereo. They are (for the left channel):

L = (L + -3dB*C + -10dB*LFE + -1dB*SL + -8dB*SR) * -10dB
Interesting, how have you measured them? Did you account for phase changes?

Alot of people and companies suggested different mixing coefficients. Some switch phase for the surround channels or even apply adaptive loudness correction to some or all channels, e.g. have the surround channels louder in general but attenuate them when the front channels get loud.

So for now there's no reason to believe MS is doing anything wrong (here), they just use another method than the simplest one proposed by ITU.

Regarding WASAPI vs DirectSound the former is definitely much harsher here and the latter softer. Not saying this has anything to do with quality. Actually DS sounds more pleasing to my ear. I guess MS is doing some polishing of the sound with DS (not that I'm aware of having any effects activated) but not with WASAPI.
mogli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2017, 09:58   #22274  |  Link
e-t172
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogli View Post
Interesting, how have you measured them? Did you account for phase changes?

Alot of people and companies suggested different mixing coefficients. Some switch phase for the surround channels or even apply adaptive loudness correction to some or all channels, e.g. have the surround channels louder in general but attenuate them when the front channels get loud.
I measured them by playing a test tone through each input channel in turn and measuring the level as it comes out the other hand. I'll admit I didn't try to determine whether it's doing any "clever" stuff like phase manipulation or non-linear processing. I was just trying to determine what the coefficients looked like in the simple, naive case so that I could compare them to other downmixers. I did not spend much time on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogli View Post
So for now there's no reason to believe MS is doing anything wrong (here), they just use another method than the simplest one proposed by ITU.
Well, in my book not following the international standard qualifies as "doing it wrong", but I guess it's a matter of debate. Ideally it should default to ITU-R BS.775 and perhaps allow the user to select another approach in the settings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mogli View Post
Regarding WASAPI vs DirectSound the former is definitely much harsher here and the latter softer. Not saying this has anything to do with quality. Actually DS sounds more pleasing to my ear. I guess MS is doing some polishing of the sound with DS (not that I'm aware of having any effects activated) but not with WASAPI.
Assuming nothing is broken on your system (e.g. your audio drivers are not doing dubious things behind your back), I cannot accept such claims. By default, aside from downmixing, the only thing the Windows audio engine does is mixing, sample format conversion, and sample rate conversion (if required). These cannot make the sound "harsher", "softer", or have any other audible effect unless they are done in a badly broken way, and they're not. This can easily be verified by e.g. using a virtual audio device (like Virtual Audio Cable) and then making loopback measurements: you'll find that there is no measurable difference whatsoever as the audio goes through the Windows audio engine and back again, aside from the obvious benign stuff that anyone would expect, like dithering noise.
e-t172 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2017, 20:39   #22275  |  Link
littleD
Registered User
 
littleD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 243
Hi nevcairiel
i know that dx11va just arrived, but did you happen to dig in dx12 video pipeline yet? Would be that anything useful or just bloat? Some header with video interfaces in win 10 SDK d3d12video.h
littleD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2017, 20:40   #22276  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 8,921
DirectX 12 doesn't add anything useful for video.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2017, 15:13   #22277  |  Link
mogli
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by e-t172 View Post
I have measured the downmix coefficients that the Windows audio engine uses to downmix 5.1 to stereo. They are (for the left channel):

L = (L + -3dB*C + -10dB*LFE + -1dB*SL + -8dB*SR) * -10dB
LFE is off by -10dB, should be -20dB, rest is correct. When using back channels instead of surrounds it's -1dB*BL + -6dB*BR.

So one can see what MS tries to accomplish:
  1. Include all channels, even LFE, but at a very low level to assure no overload occurs.
  2. Lower the stereo separation for surrounds and back channels to place them between center and fronts to hopefully decrease the masking.
Not a bad idea, I guess.

Last edited by mogli; 19th October 2017 at 07:16. Reason: addendum
mogli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2017, 14:35   #22278  |  Link
mclingo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 23
black screen (loss of HDMI handshake) on 3D movie stop.

Hi, started getting an odd problem recently, it either LAV or MADVR causing it but I cant decouple these to diagnose further. There seems to be a problem where changing back and forth from 1080p to 2160p and 3D I get a loss of handshake and I have to use DEVCON reset to get it back.

This is what happens (both KODI and MPC)

I play a 3D movie, after a few seconds on a blank screen my TV switches 3D mode and plays the movies no problems. If I stop the movie the TV comes out of 3D mode and then I get black screen.

If I put my HTPC into 1080p resolution this doesnt work so its something to do with how MADVR and LAV filters are dealing with refresh rate and resolution switching.

Any ideas anyone?
mclingo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2017, 17:23   #22279  |  Link
nevcairiel
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Posts: 8,921
That is not an area LAV interacts with. Actual output is not touched in any way, only decoded frames are being send onwards.
__________________
LAV Filters - open source ffmpeg based media splitter and decoders
nevcairiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2017, 21:19   #22280  |  Link
Pat357
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 409
Quote:
Originally Posted by mclingo View Post
Hi, started getting an odd problem recently, it either LAV or MADVR causing it but I cant decouple these to diagnose further. There seems to be a problem where changing back and forth from 1080p to 2160p and 3D I get a loss of handshake and I have to use DEVCON reset to get it back.

This is what happens (both KODI and MPC)

I play a 3D movie, after a few seconds on a blank screen my TV switches 3D mode and plays the movies no problems. If I stop the movie the TV comes out of 3D mode and then I get black screen.

If I put my HTPC into 1080p resolution this doesnt work so its something to do with how MADVR and LAV filters are dealing with refresh rate and resolution switching.

Any ideas anyone?
What modes have you listed in Madvr settings ?
When your screen is black and you go to 1080p, does it matter if your 1080p mode has a different FPS ?
like 3D 2160p 23p -> stop -> 1080p24 or 1080p50 (does this work ?)

From my experience, Madvr does handle changes in FPS very well, but if only other things change, like (2160p -> 1080p) or (3D -> not 3D) changes, it doesn't switch.
What actually means no FPS changes -> no switching !
Pat357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
decoders, directshow, filters, splitter

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:33.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.