MediaInfo(Lib) 0.7 - Reading information about media files

[SeeMoreDigital]

Wonderful work... Thanks Zenitram :)

[Zenitram]

:).

I try to do the same for DTS/DTS-HD a bit later (a bit more complex with "in the core stream" or "after the core stream" extensions, and the TrueHD was a paid work, not tthe DTS-HD stuff, so DTS-HD is in lower priority).

[kurt]

could you plz implement duration of audio/video files like

hh:mm:ss ?

my point is, seconds are missing for files > 1h.

[Zenitram]

could you plz implement duration of audio/video files like

hh:mm:ss ?

my point is, seconds are missing for files > 1h.

Seconds are not useful for a lot of people when duration is > 1 hours.

Feature request is already done, with "debug" --> "Advanced Mode" (or -f for CLI):
Duration : 6636960
Duration : 1h 50mn
Duration : 1h 50mn 36s 960ms
Duration : 1h 50mn
Duration : 01:50:36.960

You can create your custom template, and use theses fields names (from "Help" --> "Known parameters":
Duration : Play time of the stream in ms
Duration/String : Play time in format : XXx YYy only, YYy omited if zero
Duration/String1 : Play time in format : HHh MMmn SSs MMMms, XX omited if zero
Duration/String2 : Play time in format : XXx YYy only, YYy omited if zero
Duration/String3 : Play time in format : HH:MM:SS.MMM

Note: maybe a "HHh MMmn SSs" additional field is interessant?

[Brazil2]

Seconds are not useful for a lot of people when duration is > 1 hours.
I still disagree :p
But we have already discussed about that :)

[kurt]

same here. why would it be useful to hide such a information? would it bloat the gui? I guess not... If you mux videofiles with audio tracks of other files it is very useful to get the exact duration.

anyway, thx for the hint with the debugging mode :)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Zenitram,

Would it be possible to identify MPEG-4 ASP encodes generated with multiple B-VOPs separately from those encoded with just 1B-VOP?


Cheers

[Zenitram]

would it bloat the gui?

If I obey to everybody, I would have all that is in the "debug" version, and I would display 4 times the duration... Some people want hour+minutes, some other the exact value (seconds are not enough, milliseconds are needed).
This depends a lot from the "profile" of users, on Doom9 people want exact value, but on some other forum (more newbee), they want "logic" value ie only a rounded value.

This is the reason I
add a custom text. LAter, whan I have time, I plan to customize the "Easy" view with you own template too, so everybody would be able to have its perfect "Easy" view :-D.

[Zenitram]

Would it be possible to identify MPEG-4 ASP encodes generated with multiple B-VOPs separately from those encoded with just 1B-VOP?

If I understand well, instead of:
BVOP = No
BVOP = Yes.

You would like to have:
BVOP = No
BVOP = 1 frame
BVOP = 2 frames
...

?

[SeeMoreDigital]

You would like to have:
BVOP = No
BVOP = 1 frame
BVOP = 2 framesYes please.

If it possible for you to identify the actual quantity of consecutive b-frames, that would be very useful for bug testing streams for use in hardware players :)

[Zenitram]

If it possible for you to identify the actual quantity of consecutive b-frames, that would be very useful for bug testing streams for use in hardware players :)

One of my goals is to be able to know before downloading a file if the file is compatible or not with it, so I am intersted in implementing this if there is limitations in players.

But I don't currently parse the whole file (very long), only the 30 first frames, if there is 1 bframe only between I/P frames, can I say there is 99% chance to have only 1 bframe between I/P frames for the whole file?

[kurt]

If I obey to everybody, I would have all that is in the "debug" version, and I would display 4 times the duration... Some people want hour+minutes, some other the exact value (seconds are not enough, milliseconds are needed).
This depends a lot from the "profile" of users, on Doom9 people want exact value, but on some other forum (more newbee), they want "logic" value ie only a rounded value.

This is the reason I
add a custom text. LAter, whan I have time, I plan to customize the "Easy" view with you own template too, so everybody would be able to have its perfect "Easy" view :-D.
ok, thx for all of your efforts :)

[Brazil2]

This depends a lot from the "profile" of users, on Doom9 people want exact value, but on some other forum (more newbee), they want "logic" value ie only a rounded value.
Ah come on, you don't need any special technical skills to be able to read hours minutes and seconds. Newbies or not, if they are able to fiddle with video stuff then they are able to read time.
Does it really disturb them ? I doubt it. However it would be a really helpfull information without the need to switch between tabs each time we open a file.


If I understand well, instead of:
BVOP = No
BVOP = Yes.

You would like to have:
BVOP = No
BVOP = 1 frame
BVOP = 2 frames
That would be nice indeed :)


But I don't currently parse the whole file (very long), only the 30 first frames, if there is 1 bframe only between I/P frames, can I say there is 99% chance to have only 1 bframe between I/P frames for the whole file?
Say 60 frames ? After all that's only one second of a video at ~60 FPS.

[Zenitram]

Ah come on, you don't need any special technical skills to be able to read hours minutes and seconds. Newbies or not, if they are able to fiddle with video stuff then they are able to read time.

This is not the problem: some other users think this is not useful, and that this is too stupid to have seconds for a 2 hour film. Look at DVDs: this is always writen, for example, "115 minutes", "normal" users don't care of seconds in this case.
And why should I accept seconds and not milliseconds too? Some other users have asked for the precise duration in milliseconds, they say that seconds are not enough (and some others, in seconds + frames, not yet implemented but planned, because milliseconds are not interessant). Every user says that his point of view is the more logic point of view and that all other users are stupid... ;-).

Again, I know I have multiple kinds of users, multiple "profile sets" are planned. And if you are in hurry, you can compile your own version of the DLL, this is only one line of code to change, this is open source :).

Say 60 frames ? After all that's only one second of a video at ~60 FPS.

I can go up to 60 fps, yes. I will do some tests in order to see if this has no big impact on performances.

[laserfan]

And why should I accept seconds and not milliseconds too?You shouldn't. Do milliseconds too. ;)

I will do some testes in order to see if this has no big impact on performances.You might want to edit this line. Trust me on this one. :)

[SeeMoreDigital]

You shouldn't. Do milliseconds too. ;) I actually require the "milli-second" bit :)

[Zenitram]

You might want to edit this line. Trust me on this one. :)

Oups :eek::eek::eek::eek:
One day, maybe, I will know how to speak good english...

[Zenitram]

I actually require the "milli-second" bit :)

eh eh... This is a lot requested feature here... I promiss I don't forget this "profiles" feature, but days are only 24 hour long!

[laserfan]

Oups :eek::eek::eek::eek:
One day, maybe, I will know how to speak good english...Not to worry--if you speak half as well as you write, you're doing just great!:cool:

[zn]

0.26 beta still show "Resolution" field for AAC inside MP4 videos or M4A podcasts, it is hiddenly only when viewing raw .aac files (adts)

no such problem with mp3 and mp3 inside avi
no such problem with ac3 and ac3 inside mkv

[Zenitram]

0.26 beta still show "Resolution" field for AAC inside MP4 videos or M4A podcasts, it is hiddenly only when viewing raw .aac files (adts)

no such problem with mp3 and mp3 inside avi
no such problem with ac3 and ac3 inside mkv

See http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1344305#post1344305

So it should also be removed in MP3 now (0.7.26 released).

[zn]

I know. But with different AAC formats (Codec ID) it have different results:

aac in m4a (incorrect?)

Audio
ID : 1
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format version : Version 4
Format profile : LC
Format settings, SBR : No
Codec ID : 40
Duration : 1h 25mn
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 128 Kbps
Maximum bit rate : 136 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Stream size : 78.5 MiB (99%)
Title : Imported with GPAC 0.4.6-DEV (build 1)
Encoded date : UTC 2009-11-04 01:41:48
Tagged date : UTC 2009-11-04 01:42:00


aac in flv (incorrect?)
Audio
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format version : Version 4
Format profile : LC
Format settings, SBR : No
Duration : 55mn 24s
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits


aac in mkv (correct?)

Audio
ID : 1
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format version : Version 4
Format profile : LC
Format settings, SBR : No
Codec ID : A_AAC
Duration : 22mn 5s
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Video delay : 9ms
Language : English


I can make sameples if you need

Looks like it is correct when 'Codec ID : A_AAC', incorrect when 'Codec ID : ?" or "Codec ID : 40"

[Atak_Snajpera]

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/1231/new1i.png
Why chapters are under "Menu" section instead of "Chapters". Why did you change that?

[Zenitram]

I know. But with different AAC formats (Codec ID) it have different results:

I removed the "resolution" field from the AAC/MPEG Audio parsers, but not from the containers (they indicates 16 bits too!).

I added a rule in order to disable "Resolution" in the case of AAC/MPEG Audio.

Please test:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mediainfo/files/development_snapshots/0.7.26%2B/MediaInfo_GUI_20100102_Windows_i386_WithoutInstaller.7z/download

No more AAC / MPEG audio files from my samples directory have Resolution field now, if you still have one, I need it.

[Zenitram]

Why chapters are under "Menu" section instead of "Chapters". Why did you change that?

There were some misunderstandings between Chapters and Menu sections, and Chapters section was not a good idea: chapters are sometimes related to programs (e.g. in MPEG-TS), which are in the Menu section.
So I merged the Chapters section into the Menu section, output is more coherent between containers.

[zn]

now it is correct

[LoRd_MuldeR]

Hello. I'm encoding a MP3 file with the following command-line:

C:\Temp\Wurst>lame -q 2 -V 5 "[01] Fliehende Stürme - Das Chaos brütet.wav" "[01] Fliehende Stürme - Das Chaos brütet.mp3"
LAME 3.98.2 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
CPU features: MMX (ASM used), SSE (ASM used), SSE2
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 16538 Hz - 17071 Hz
Encoding [01] Fliehende St³rme - Das Chaos br³tet.wav
to [01] Fliehende St³rme - Das Chaos br³tet.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=5)
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
10996/10996 (100%)| 0:09/ 0:09| 0:09/ 0:09| 30.757x| 0:00
32 [ 106] %*
40 [ 1] %
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 1] *
80 [ 1] *
96 [ 117] **
112 [ 1050] %*************
128 [ 3193] %%***************************************
160 [ 5316] %%%%***************************************************************
192 [ 881] %%**********
224 [ 199] %**
256 [ 112] %*
320 [ 19] %
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps LR MS % long switch short %
149.2 5.1 94.9 95.3 2.7 2.0
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -8.5dB

However Media-Info reports the following:

General
Complete name : C:\Temp\Wurst\[01] Fliehende Stürme - Das Chaos brütet.mp3
Format : MPEG Audio
File size : 5.10 MiB
Duration : 4mn 47s
Overall bit rate : 149 Kbps
Writing library : LAME3.98r

Audio
Format : MPEG Audio
Format version : Version 1
Format profile : Layer 3
Duration : 4mn 47s
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 149 Kbps
Minimum bit rate : 32.0 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Stream size : 5.10 MiB (100%)
Writing library : LAME3.98r
Encoding settings : -m j -V 5 -q 0 -lowpass 16.5 --vbr-new -b 32

So does MediaInfo "extract" the LAME command-line wrong or does LAME store the wrong command-line options in the file? Or what do I miss?

Note that this problem apparently only occurs with VBR mode, not with ABR mode :confused:

[Placio74]

BTW
Rather does not concerns Lame 3.97 and 4.0 alpha 14, so...

[MatLz]

Hi Zenitram!
First, thx for your great tool!
But I experience a little problem since 0.7.26: all my videos and pics appear as 8bits resolution in the report. 0.7.25 was ok.

[zn]

LoRd_MuldeR, lame ignores -q in flavor of -v, this key is not relevant
Encoding as 44.1 kHz j-stereo MPEG-1 Layer III VBR(q=5)

[LoRd_MuldeR]

LoRd_MuldeR, lame ignores -q in flavor of -v, this key is not relevant

LAME ignores "-q 2", uses "q=5" instead and finally MediaInfo reports "-q 0" :confused:

Sorry, but that doesn't make much sense to me!

In fact I think the "VBR(q=5)" in LAME's console output actually refers to the "-V 5" option and not to the "-q" option.

Still that doesn't explain why I pass "-q 2", but afterwards MediaInfo detects "-q 0" :rolleyes:

Either LAME ignores my option, LAME writes the wrong info to the file -or- MediaInfo reports wrong information...

[Inspector.Gadget]

Any chance the Windows GUI "Donate" button can be move so it doesn't block a scrollbar, text, or any other important part of the window?

[aba101280]

Hi,

thank you very much for your library. In the last weeks I tried to use it for developing a small frame rate analyzer that can automatically switch the frequency of the TV/Beamer.

This works fine for all supported VideosCodes. What I’m looking for is some information about the handling of DVD and Blu-Ray Structures. Of course Mediainfo can provide the framerate of Video files on Blu-Ray but as most of them are decrypted this does not work. For DVDs the information is also in the IFO File which can be read by Mediainfo. Do you know if there’s any possibility to get out the framerate of the Blu-Ray structure? Or is there (like DVD) a file that can be read out?

Would be happy if you have some information on this?

Regards,

Alex

[Zenitram]

But I experience a little problem since 0.7.26: all my videos and pics appear as 8bits resolution in the report. 0.7.25 was ok.

"24 bit" was a mistake. "Classic" usage is to speak about "bit per pixel", so 8,9,10 bits per pixel, as in video format specifications.
So if you have "8 bits" instead of "24 bit", this is normal

[Zenitram]

Any chance the Windows GUI "Donate" button can be move so it doesn't block a scrollbar, text, or any other important part of the window?

I implemented it this donate button too quickly.
I will change it a bit later.

[Zenitram]

Of course Mediainfo can provide the framerate of Video files on Blu-Ray but as most of them are decrypted this does not work. For DVDs the information is also in the IFO File which can be read by Mediainfo. Do you know if there’s any possibility to get out the framerate of the Blu-Ray structure? Or is there (like DVD) a file that can be read out?

MediaInfo does already not read the IFO equivalent to Blu-ray.
This is planned, but not yet done.
So if your files are encrypted, MediaInfo can't read the framerate.

I am a lot busy in the next weeks, so I will not implement blu-ray structure support soon :(.

[aba101280]

Hi,

thanks a lot for your answer. BDINFO reads out the framerate even with encrypted files. I think it does it by reading the *clpi data (Thanks Madshi). I tried to find out how this is done in the source code but no way for me.

I am a lot busy in the next weeks, so I will not implement blu-ray structure support soon .

Thank you for doing it, it does not matter when. IT#s free for all and it does more you can expect :-)

Regards,

Alex

[b66pak]

mediainfo and +4gb wav files error...

the examples below are from the same wav file written by three tools: eac3to, wavi, wavfix.

wav file size is 4,570,841,156 bytes


eac3to:

wav header:
52 49 46 46 3C 80 71 10 57 41 56 45 66 6D 74 20
28 00 00 00 FE FF 06 00 80 BB 00 00 00 2F 0D 00
12 00 18 00 16 00 18 00 0F 06 00 00 01 00 00 00
00 00 10 00 80 00 00 AA 00 38 9B 71 64 61 74 61
00 80 71 10

mediainfo report:
General
Complete name : eac3to.wav
Format : Wave
File size : 4.26 GiB
Duration : 1h 28mn
Overall bit rate : 6 912 Kbps

Audio
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Little
Format settings, Sign : Unsigned
Codec ID : 00001000-0000-0100-8000-00AA00389B71
Codec ID/Hint : Microsoft
Duration : 1h 28mn
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 6 912 Kbps
Channel(s) : 6 channels
Channel positions : Front: L, C, R, Middle: L, R, LFE
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Resolution : 24 bits
Stream size : 4.26 GiB (100%)


wavi:

wav header:
52 49 46 46 F0 FF FF FF 57 41 56 45 66 6D 74 20
28 00 00 00 FE FF 06 00 80 BB 00 00 00 2F 0D 00
12 00 18 00 16 00 18 00 0F 06 00 00 01 00 00 00
00 00 10 00 80 00 00 AA 00 38 9B 71 64 61 74 61
B4 FF FF FF

mediainfo report:
General
Complete name : wavi.wav
Format : Wave
File size : 4.26 GiB
Duration : 1h 22mn
Overall bit rate : 7 356 Kbps

Audio
Format : PCM
Format settings, Endianness : Little
Format settings, Sign : Unsigned
Codec ID : 00001000-0000-0100-8000-00AA00389B71
Codec ID/Hint : Microsoft
Duration : 1h 22mn
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 6 912 Kbps
Channel(s) : 6 channels
Channel positions : Front: L, C, R, Middle: L, R, LFE
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Resolution : 24 bits
Stream size : 4.00 GiB (94%)


wavfix:

wav header:
52 49 46 46 0C 00 00 00 57 41 56 45 66 6D 74 20
28 00 00 00 FE FF 06 00 80 BB 00 00 00 2F 0D 00
12 00 18 00 16 00 18 00 0F 06 00 00 01 00 00 00
00 00 10 00 80 00 00 AA 00 38 9B 71 64 61 74 61
D0 FF FF FF

mediainfo report:
General
Complete name : wavfix.wav
Format : Wave
File size : 4.26 GiB

Audio
Format : 0
Codec ID : 0
Bit rate : 0
Channel(s) : channel0
Sampling rate : 0


as tebasuna51 said:

the differences are two fields, the yellow one is the filesize - 8, and the sienna one is the audio data size...both fields are invalid in a +4gb wav because with 4 bytes we can't put a value greater than 2^32...the soft that support +4gb wav files must ignore the two fields (maybe with parameters like -ignolength, -readtoeof, ...)


mediainfo report is correct only for the eac3to file...you should overcome this by reading the wav size from the disk and calculating the duration like this:

duration (in ms) = (wav_size_from_disk - wav_header)/(nr_of_channels * (resolution / 8) * sampling_rate)

also will be nice to have displayed the full duration: hh:min:sec:ms


best regards
_

[Zenitram]

the examples below are from the same wav file written by three tools: eac3to, wavi, wavfix.

And the three tools are totally wrong...


mediainfo report is correct only for the eac3to file...you should overcome this by reading the wav size from the disk and calculating the duration like this:

... Which may be false when there is metadata (some metadata may be 100 MB with some standards!) after the "data" chunk. Worse, some metadata in some standards (BWF and so on) may have a 4 GB non-data chunk next to a 100 GB data chunk (do'nt laught, such files exist...), how to handle this?

the soft that support +4gb wav files must ignore the two fields

No: the soft that supports +4GB wav files MUST reject this kind of invalid files, and writting tools should create valid files (ie not to create classic but broken WAV file as they do with +4BG files). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF64 and http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3306-2009.pdf

Anyway, I added support for the 2 other broken WAV file kinds, please test https://sourceforge.net/projects/mediainfo/files/development_snapshots/0.7.28%2B/MediaInfo_GUI_20100228_Windows_i386_WithoutInstaller.7z/download and let me know if there is still an issue.

And please, report bug to the software creators, they violate WAV specifications and they should not do it.

also will be nice to have displayed the full duration: hh:min:sec:ms_

Ah, everybody asks for a different format!
Easy view is not yet customizable (this is planned, but not currently a priority), you can create a text template with "HH:MM:SS.mmm" already existing field if you desire.

[b66pak]

thanks a lot...reports are OK now...

i have noticed than you change the channel mask interpretation...

for 1551 (0x0000060F) before was "Front: L C R, Middle: L R, LFE" and now is "Front: L C R, Surround: L R, LFE"...this is very confusing (surround is vague)...

i may suggest to use Microsoft's terminology:

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/audio/multichaud.mspx#E4C

and add the channel mask value to the description to avoid any misunderstanding...for example:

Channel positions : Front: L, C, R, Surround: L, R, LFE

would become:

Channel mask : 1551 (Front: L, C, R, Side: L, R, LFE)
_

[Zenitram]

i may suggest to use Microsoft's terminology:

My problem is that I try to have a common terminology about this, whatever is the format (AC-3, DTS, TrueHD, DTS-HD, PCM, Wavpack, ...), and... This is awful!
AC-3 and DTS speak often about "Surround".
I hesitate.
But discussion is here:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/mediainfo/forums/forum/297609/topic/3566895
Please comment at this place about this issue.

FYI, this is a bit difficult, because this is usualy (with the last development snapshot):
7.1: Front: L C R, Surround: L R, Back: L R, LFE
6.1: Front: L C R, Surround: L R, Back: C, LFE
5.1: Front: L C R, Surround: L R, LFE
but in some PCM I found, this is:
5.1: Front: L C R, Back: L R, LFE (yes, some 5.1 are with "Side" from Microsoft, sometimes "Back" from Microsoft)
So I don't know if it is better to replace "Surround" by "Side"... In any case, PCM modification will impact AC-3 and DTS too. Let continue on the Sourceforge thread.

add the channel mask value to the description to avoid any misunderstanding

Channel mask is technical, only flags, and Microsoft-centric. The goal of MediaInfo is to avoid technical/flags, and to display the same value whatever is the analyzed format. For the same reason, replacing the field name by "mask" is not possible, too technical and lot of formats have no mask, but an index.

[b66pak]

my suggestion with the channel mask was for extended_wav_format.wavs only! i don't think that a global approach for all audio file types is good! it should be personalized.

about the terminolgy: at least for extended_wav_format.wavs you should stay with the Microsoft standard...

also see this:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1375940#post1375940
_

[Zenitram]

my suggestion with the channel mask was for extended_wav_format.wavs only! i don't think that a global approach for all audio file types is good! it should be personalized.

MediaInfo is definitly not the right tool for you.
It is intended for people who have fixed channel positions at home, and who would like to know which channel is used whatever is the format. So the channel name is fixed. (peronnaly, I don't change the position of my loudspeakers depends of the format I try to read).
MediaInfo is not a WAV specific tool, "Side" stuff was an error from my point of view when I implemented PCM channel position. MediaInfo goal is "only one name for one item". the name of the item can change, but for all format at the same time.


about the terminolgy: at least for extended_wav_format.wavs you should stay with the Microsoft standard...

Microsoft is not a standard, but... Microsoft specific.
And at home, my speakers don't have any "Side" name. sO I take the right to use Dolby terminology rather than Microsoft Terminology.
See http://www.dolby.com/consumer/setup/speaker-setup-guide/index.html

If you think my mapping from Microsoft names is not right, don't hesitate to warn me, I will change it.
But if it is only to use MS name for WAV, and Dobly name for AC-3, no way, I want to use the same name whatever is the format (MediaInfo is format-independant!).

Currently, I have:
- "Side" from MS --> Surround (as "Surround" from Dolby)
- "Back" from MS --> Back (as "Back" from Dolby)

Is it wrong?

If I understood well the trhead you linked, should I change something in the case of 5.1 from MS (there are both 0x600 and 0x30 files, are they put in the same loudspeaker in reality?)

also see this:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1375940#post1375940
_

There is an issue. My 7.1 PCM files have the 0x63F channel mask. 0x600 (side) and 0x30 (back) are in the same file, so theses channels are definitly not in the same position. I must handle 7.1 files as well as 6.1 or 5.1 files.

If you think that my current PCM mapping is wrong, no problem, let me know which file has which output at your home (based on the Dolby names), and I will study it.

Dolby names:
Front L Front C Front R

Surround L People Surround R

Back L (Back C for DTS 6.1) Back R

I need to know what is the name from MS point of view for each loudspeaker of this schema (if it is depends of the count of speakers, let me know).
Same for TrueHD and DTS-HD too (I am not 100% sure of the mapping, I am only sure about how my loudspeakers are at home)

[SeeMoreDigital]

This is the verbal "channel description" for the Dolby TrueHD speaker mapping test file: -

http://i46.tinypic.com/mwve9s.jpg

[LoRd_MuldeR]

And of course it only works with a full set of B&W Nautilus speakers :D

[b66pak]

Currently, I have:
- "Side" from MS --> Surround (as "Surround" from Dolby)
- "Back" from MS --> Back (as "Back" from Dolby)

Surround L People Surround R

Surround should be Side! Why should you mix MS with Dolby terminology?

As i said "surround" is vague (is marketing stuff in my opinion!).
_

P.S. nice diagrams here (with correct naming): http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/34579/129023.html
_

[SeeMoreDigital]

With the old Dolby EX and DTS ES 6.1 set-ups the "rear speaker(s)" had to be positioned behind and between the "Right Rear Surround" and "Left Rear Surround" speakers...

So for people like me... I've got to re-locate my speakers (again) :eek:

[Zenitram]

OK, lot of people interested in Channel positions here, so let try to make something good.
I repeated the basic rule for MediaInfo: one loudspeaker position = one name, whatever is the format (AC-3, TrueHD, DTS, DTS-HD, Microsoft PCM).

This is the verbal "channel description" for the Dolby TrueHD speaker mapping test file: -


This is not the naming convention from http://www.dolby.com/consumer/setup/speaker-setup-guide/index.html ...

Surround should be Side! Why should you mix MS with Dolby terminology?

I try to have a terminology independant from the vendor (MS or Dolby or DTS or someone else), but the same whatever is the input format. Having different names for the same thing is defintly not the principe for MediaInfo. All is not yet perfect in MediaInfo, but my goal is that.

As i said "surround" is vague (is marketing stuff in my opinion!).

OK, let's go on "Side" instead of "Surround".
I currently keep "Back" but this may be replaced by "Rear", isn't it? Let's continue with "Back" if everybody agree.

Funny thing: b66pak says that "Side" is the best word, SeeMoreDigital displays a schema with "Surround", you must agree one a terminology please, I keep only one name!

With the old Dolby EX and DTS ES 6.1 set-ups the "rear speaker(s)" had to be positioned behind and between the "Right Rear Surround" and "Left Rear Surround" speakers...

So for people like me... I've got to re-locate my speakers (again) :eek:

Arghh... :). The principe for MediaInfo is mainly: if the speaker is at 1 fixed position, it has only 1 name. But if it is at a different position, it should have another name...

So, let try to summarize all if I well understood (L=Left, R=Right, C=Center):
- Front is for 22-30°, L+R (and 0° for C)
- Side is for 90-110°, L+R
- Back is for 135-150°, L+R (and 180° for C, ie 6.1)

I received file with some "High" channel positions (I think this is the same as "Top" for Microsoft), how should I name them? I am think to TopFront, TopSide, TopBack

I also received DTS sample with "Wide" channels, is it OK if I add:
- Wide is for 60°, L+R

I also received DTS sample with "Ls" and "Rs" (Left/Right Surround), picture put them between "Side" and "Back", what is the angle for them? Is it different position then Side or Back?

After we decided how to name each speaker in a room, I need the mapping between each format setting and theses speaker names, at your keyboards ;-).

Note: I don't see the difference for Microsoft "Top Center - TC" and "Top Front Center - TFC", any idea?

Now, I wait for proposals :).

[kypec]

I personally do not own any surround speakers system at home (yet) but since I started to learn about home-cinema in mid 90's, all the terminologies and technologies involved, there was always (at least in the era of 5.1 sound systems) used the term surround effect channels. Beginning with Dolby ProLogic II, continuing with Dolby Digital and emerging DTS then.
I prefer to stick with Left/Right Surround (5.1 & 6.1 & 7.1) and Left/Right/Center+Rear Surround (6.1 & 7.1) speaker names. I could do with Back instead of Rear but Side just doesn't fit well to me.

[SeeMoreDigital]

This is not the naming convention from http://www.dolby.com/consumer/setup/speaker-setup-guide/index.html ...How odd....

Because when you play their TrueHD (A/V) sample you hear a woman say, the following: -

This is the "Left Channel".
Next we have the "Centre Channel".
Over here is the "Right Channel".
This is the "Right Surround Channel".
Now the "Right Rear Surround Channel".
Next the "Left Rear Surround Channel".
This is the "Left Surround Channel".
The next sound you'll hear is the "LFE Channel".

I wish these "professionals" would make up their minds :eek: