audio on DVD2AVI

[noldzy]

is it ok to demux the audio or decode it?
I'd like ac3 extracted.

[Sefy]

Well, you might like AC3 extracted, but will that help you ?

[adam]

You can do it either way. You can use azid to process the ac3 after you extract it. Thats actually alot better than letting dvd2avi process the audio, it will be much faster and also higher quality.

[stanwebber]

perhaps my system is due for an overhaul, but latest beta of dvd2avi decodes slightly faster than azid(you said nothing about downsampling or downmixing). i've give you higher quality although i dont agree since only you are in a position to evaluate the results on your dolby setup

[adam]

Well I don't know too many people who dont at least downmix, and most downsample too and thats what really slows dvd2avi down. I havent used either program to process audio in a long time since I prefer graphedit to both however I remember dvd2avi taking much longer than anything else I've ever used. Yes quality issues are always relative but in the case of dvd2avi vs azid, I think the differences are clear on just about any hardware setup.

[stanwebber]

your observations might be more credible if the software ver you based them on were more up to date. as to downmixing it is not a forgone default setting....most of the stuff i work with is dolby digital 2.0 so it's inappropriate. i guess i'm not most people because i decode in dvd2avi & downsample with ssrc. god i detest graphedit....i had to use it to downmix before azid & the last few betas of dvd2avi, but the windvd directshow filters never quite got it right & DRC was too compressed(obvious transitions). unfortunately, my dolby setup(or my neighbors for that matter) wont cooperate with your blanket assertion: at best azid sounds comparable to dvd2avi decoding on some sources

[Sefy]

Adam, I know i'm a rare one on the board, but I never downmix or downsample using DVD2AVI, and I know i'm propably among the only ones here who don't do SVCD, but i've not yet had a single Audio problem with what I do, and I play it on my Pioneer Dolby system, if there were problems, i'd hear them, and so far i've got smooth playing.

I'm starting to think those who are having all those Audio Pops and Noises are those who do SVCD, and it's beginning to sound like SVCD is pretty crap with all it's associated problems.

[adam]

Stanwebber your posts seem very confrontational for something which boils down to personal opinion. I made no blanket assertions whatsoever. I stated my personal opinion and suggested that it was the opinion shared by the majority of people.

Most people downmix and downsample. Most people who are knowledgable about audio prefer the quality of azid and graphedit with direct show filters to dvd2avi. No I have not conducted a poll but if you read enough audio forums you will see that this is the general consensus. I am making subjective statements about subjective differences. If your opinion differs thats fine but that doesnt mean you have a right to attack mine. And yes, using the latest versions of all programs dvd2avi IS slower for me than both azid and graphedit and dvd2avi DOES contain a bug which can cause sync problems though it happens rarely. "at best azid sounds comparable to dvd2avi decoding on some sources"...Now THAT'S a blanket assertion.

Sefy svcd and vcd use the exact same type of audio, mpeg1 audio layer II, and svcd supports the same audio bitrates as vcd. The encoding and authoring methods for audio are also basically the same for each format as well. I don't feel svcd has any more problems with audio than vcd because the audio is really no different. If your source and methods are ok than you should never get any audio pops or noises, regardless of what format your making.

[stanwebber]

so which is it? have you not used dvd2avi or azid in a LONG TIME as you stated or was it yesterday? make up your mind. if i seem confrontational it's because your statements are subtlely yet insultingly condescending: "Most people who are knowledgable about audio prefer...". if i'm being insulting in my response then you understand me perfectly. as to blanket statements at least i compared dvd2avi vs azid on my OWN & neighbors systems. you would have us believe that nearly every dolby setup conforms to your outdated & untested observations: "I think the differences are clear on just about any hardware setup". stop using assumptions about what most people do to prop up your statements and we wont have any problems

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: stanwebber on 2001-12-07 18:31:59 ]</font>

[Sefy]

adam, I apologise if I sounded as I was attacking your method, it was not my intention, just wanted to share my experience, and I may have put the words in unpropper manner, sorry.

[Shabubu]

It is actally a pretty general consensus that Azid does a better downmix (this is taking into account several forums), but that it can be tricky to set up, thus the use of DVD2AVI (which is a little too inflexible for me). It is definately agreed that SSRC is the best way to resample, both for speed and quality (I can dig up the reports if you want, some guy did his thesis on it).

If your happy with DVD2AVI then fine, and if your happy with azid then fine. There's no need to get upset over it.

[stanwebber]

that's all well and good, but what do you personally think? let other people who have an opinion based on personal observations express it themselves; quoting what other people think is not an opinion. back at the very beginning of the year i would have agreed dvd2avi audio was problematic at best, but that was then. everyone is entitled to their own opinion no matter how contrary, but if you dont have personal pragmatic experience with the up to date software in question then you have no opinion to give

[Shabubu]

I used to say what I personally think, then I came here and people keep sayng "your mistaken" or "God YOUR WRONG"... now personally after 2 years of reading everything I can find on topics like this I really don't feel that I have to justify my theories and experience, especially after I have tried to justify my reasons and people completely ignore them anyway. Personally I feel that Azid is far superior (as I did already say), especially as it's so tweakable. But then again I use avisynth almost exclusively so it's obvious that I like to tweak.

My preference for doing the encode

DVDDecryptor: ripping (smartripper/vstrip for difficult ones)
DVD2AVI>Gknot (for setting up the avisynth script)
AZID/LAME GUI And Azid/WaveboosterCLI/SSRC/tooLame: Audio
(add the resultant wav to the script and split in script)
Script to CCE (SVCD) or TMPGEnc(VCD)
Multiplex in BBMPEG.

I Have personal experience with up to date software as I basically download everything from doom9 on a daily basis.

[adam]

Stanwebber I always keep the latest version of dvd2avi on my hardrive since I use it to frameserve, just with audio decoding off. As my earlier post stated dvd2avi was always slower for me than any other program, but for the sake of argument I tested all programs mentioned and reported my results in my later post. It took maybe 15 mins to do the little test and I had plenty of time between posts to run the test.

I don't feel my posts are condescending at all, I just attempt to make them accurate. Had I said most people prefer azid to dvd2avi I would have been incorrect. When I claim that most people with knowledge about audio prefer azid, I am not suggesting anything about myself nor implying anything about you, I am simply being accurate. Most people who have taken the time run meaningful tests between each program agree that azid is superior to dvd2avi in quality.

Stanwebber the advice that people give on this forum has to transend their own experiences. Yes I prefer azid to dvd2avi on my own hardware setup, but if I limited my advice only to people who share my hardware setup then I wouldn't be much help. As I said in my previous post the general consensus is that azid is higher quality than dvd2avi and my own personal experiences suggest the same. It is for this reason that if someone brings up dvd2avi's audio decoding quality compared to azid's, then I will always suggest that azid is higher quality.

I am not going to put disclaimers at the end of my posts, nor am I going to show graphs and pictures to back up each statement. If you disagree with any subjective statement I make then simply state your own opinion, but there is no reason to be rude.

Sefy, the bulk of that last post was not directed towards you. I was not offended by your post at all, just responding to it.

[Sefy]

Adam, I'm glad to hear that there are no hard feelings!
Shabubu, don't pay too much attnetion to what people say, most people simply reject what they don't know, look at me, i'm not a genius (trust me i'm not!) and with my limited knowledge on VCD's or SVCD's, I wrote a guide on how to do the thing! heck, I didn't even want to do Chapters untill my friend pushed me to doing so

What i'm saying is, so what if people say you are wrong, if it works for you, you are entitled to share your opinions, wheater people will accept it or not, that's their choice.