madVR - high quality video renderer (GPU assisted)

[Amuat]

Thank you! I have somehow completely missed MPC-BE. Seems like it could possibly be better than HC although they seem very similar, would it be worth it to make the change and redo all the settings?

[Sunspark]

You don't have to change anything, you can have both installed at the same time and both allow you to select the renderers you want to use.

Try their renderer out first. The madvr settings are kept in the windows registry & madvr directory so they won't change from what you already set, so if you want to reset those settings you have to run the restore default settings script in the madvr directory.

[clsid]

Changing player won't help with issues that are specific to MadVR.

But you should try resetting MadVR to defaults. First make it work stable with completely default settings. Then adjust step by step to improve quality.

[Amuat]

No, I was just thinking if I should change to BE for use with MPCVR. clsid, you are the one who's taken the reins over HC right? Is it outdated information that BE has more advanced features/better support for the most modern file types, purely based on comparing it to the state the original developer left it at back in 2017?

[Sunspark]

You can have both installed at the same time. See how it is.

[huhn]

the mpc-be thread is the defacto thread for mpc-VR.

and about feature... it really doesn't matter for video renderer support.
for video file type support mpc-hc uses lavfilter which is in active development. mpc-hc isn't going anywhere.

other feature yeah good luck... mpc-hc has libass support mpc-be doesn't.
mpc-be supports a internal web page parser mpc-hc doesn't.
you can now go on like that... at best you make some devs angry and at worst you start a flame war with some elitist user like me.

what so ever the madVR thread is not the place.

[clsid]

MPC-HC has better internal filters than BE.
MPC-HC has much better subtitle renderer than BE.

MPC-HC has just as active development as BE. The only reason the BE changelogs much longer are due to internal filter related stuff, which is an external project in case of MPC-HC.

[Aleksoid1978]

Originally Posted by clsid

MPC-HC has better internal filters than BE.
MPC-HC has much better subtitle renderer than BE.

It's not true, nothing better.

[huhn]

here we go...

and because i like to throw a fuel tanker into the fire.
mpc-hc is objectively the better player it supports scaling in light skin! checkmate literally unusable.

[JarrettH]

Originally Posted by clsid

MPC-HC has better internal filters than BE.
MPC-HC has much better subtitle renderer than BE.

MPC-HC has just as active development as BE. The only reason the BE changelogs much longer are due to internal filter related stuff, which is an external project in case of MPC-HC.

Kind of wondered this myself and will switch if it means no more separate LAV One thing I do miss about BE is the audio track / subtitle language access via user interface icon. Oh also, is there any difference between SaneAR and MPC Audio Renderer?

[clsid]

A new customizable toolbar might be coming later this year.
But tracks can easily be accessed through right-click menu, or LAV Splitter tray icon if you enable that. You can also define advanced track selection rules in the splitter settings to have the correct ones be selected automatically.

The audio renderers are very similar, two different implementations of a WASAPI renderer. Just try either one and unless you have issues, no reason to switch.

[tebasuna51]

I need the Custom channel mapping present in mpc-hc Audio Switcher.

This way, whether mpc-hc decodes a correct EAC3/m4a/flac 5.1.2 or an fake AAC/Opus 7.1 with inverted 5.1.2 channels (BL-BR contain FHL-FHR), the result will be the desired one: hearing the top channels through the fake back channels.

[huhn]

the insanely powerful ffmpeg sound processor in mpc-be should be able to do that and much more.

hrtf sound mixing is maybe something i have to investigate.