What is the technical difference between Avi Demuxe and Virtual Dub ?

[Digmen1]

In layman's terms how would you describe the difference between AviDemuxe and Virtual Dub?

Are they based on different engines?

What are the basic advantages of either.

Thanks

[Baldrick]

Avidemux is more an all-in-one converter/editor with some filters and basic editing.
Avidemux has builtin support for many video input formats and can output to several containers. BUT it often crashes...

VirtualDub is mainly geared toward capturing and processing AVI files.
Virtualdub is MUCH more stable but you need plugins to be able to open different video containers like mp4,mkv,wmv etc. And you are basicly limited to avi output.

[Stears555]

Avidemux is more an all-in-one converter with some filters and basic editing.
Avidemux has builtin support for many video input formats and can output to several containers. BUT it often crashes...

VirtualDub is mainly geared toward capturing and processing AVI files.
Virtualdub is MUCH more stable but you need plugins to be able to open different video containers like mp4,mkv,wmv etc. And you are basicly limited to avi output.

The containers and video formats in Avidemux are very very limited. Just try it! Avidemux hasn't major upgrade since 2009.....

[Baldrick]

You can use avi,mp4 and mkv. What else do you need?

[Stears555]

You can use avi,mp4 and mkv. What else do you need?

You can find these formats in all primitive converters too. There are bugs with direct stream copy and there are frame rate problems. Avidemux use only the backward huffyuv lossless codec, but it hasn't the more modern (and fundamental) FFV1 codec. It can't handle even AC3 audio codec in many containers. When you try to create a flash video format, you can't use it with h.264 encoders..... They are basic deficiencies!
It was a good software by mid 2000s standrd, but nowadays it is backward.

[Baldrick]

This is about Virtualdub vs avidemux. Not other converters.

Flash supports mp4 so you don't need any flv container.

[Stears555]

This is about Virtualdub vs avidemux. Not other converters.

Flash supports mp4 so you don't need any flv container.

Many web video designer softwares don't support mp4 format.
Avidemux and handbrake can't handle even the so called progressive segmented frame videos, therefore they significantly worsened their quality. As I said: Avidemux and Handbrake are on the technical level of the transcoders from the mid 2000s

[hech54]

As I said: Avidemux and Handbrake are on the technical level of the transcoders from the mid 2000s

You saying it over and over again does not make it true.
My stable of toys consists of AviDemux, VirtualDub, HandBrake, WinFF, MPEGVCR and Magix Movie Edit 15......I can do anything I want with what I have.
You don't know your @§§ from a hole in the ground.

[Stears555]

As I said: Avidemux and Handbrake are on the technical level of the transcoders from the mid 2000s

You saying it over and over again does not make it true.
My stable of toys consists of AviDemux, VirtualDub, HandBrake, WinFF, MPEGVCR and Magix Movie Edit 15......I can do anything I want with what I have.
You don't know your @§§ from a hole in the ground.

Thank you for your "polite" reply, but can you tell me the difference between these transcoders and an average mid 2000s transcoder?

[hech54]

Thank you for your "polite" reply, but can you tell me the difference between these transcoders and an average mid 2000s transcoder?

Your very welcome.
Does your crystal ball also tell us what type of video the OP will be dealing with?.....or maybe the level of expertise of the OP?

[Stears555]

Thank you for your "polite" reply, but can you tell me the difference between these transcoders and an average mid 2000s transcoder?

Your very welcome.
Does your crystal ball also tell us what type of video the OP will be dealing with?.....or maybe the level of expertise of the OP?

Xmedia recode is more professional and versatile than these. These transcoders haven't much detailed codec settings, or they don't suport so many container formats. The options for the h.264 codec are miserably poor in most of the mentioned transcoders... Moreover they don't support the very basic direct stream copy options in most containers.

[ozok]

@Stears555
Xmedia recode and avidemux or virtualdub are not in the same category. Avidemux is more like an editor whereas Xmedia Recode is an converter with some editing abilities. If you ask me, they serve different purposes. That is my opinion.

Also, Avidemux not getting any "major" updates does not make it abandoned or outdated. I do not know what you mean by major update but AFAIK avidemux uses many different libraries and many of these libraries get updated frequently. So when avidemux gets a minor update, maybe some big changes might have happened in one these libraries.

@OP
Avidemux supports many input and output formats natively. Also it is cross-platform.

[Stears555]

@Stears555
Xmedia recode and avidemux or virtualdub are not in the same category. Avidemux is more like an editor whereas Xmedia Recode is an converter with some editing abilities. If you ask me, they serve different purposes. That is my opinion.

Also, Avidemux not getting any "major" updates does not make it abandoned or outdated. I do not know what you mean by major update but AFAIK avidemux uses many different libraries and many of these libraries get updated frequently. So when avidemux gets a minor update, maybe some big changes might have happened in one these libraries.

@OP
Avidemux supports many input and output formats natively. Also it is cross-platform.

Avidemux use only very few container formats and very few encoders. In avidemux most encoders are not compatible (or they have bugs) with the few comntainer formats. The other mentioned softwares also not support the direct-stream copy technology (or they have bugs). Dont forget: the direct stream copy is a basic expectations from a modern software in the 2010s. The handbrake also haven't even detailed options for h.264 encoding.

Those softwares -which haven't detailed h.264 encoding options- produce poor quality videos.

[Stears555]

I suggest for everybody these comparison on wikipedia:

Please focus on the so-called output formats

Comparison of video converters


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_video_converters

[filmboss80]

I suggest for everybody these comparison on wikipedia:

Please focus on the so-called output formats

Comparison of video converters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_video_converters

So? That's solely a comparison of CONVERTERS. VirtualDub and Avidemux are also rudimentary editors with processing/enhancing capabilities. Many of us use a variety of tools to perform the specific tasks for which each tool excels. There are also issues about stability and such that are not compared in the the wikipedia link.

Speaking of wikipedia, I suppose it is the last word on every subject? Hmmmm?

[Stears555]

I suggest for everybody these comparison on wikipedia:

Please focus on the so-called output formats

Comparison of video converters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_video_converters

So? That's solely a comparison of CONVERTERS. VirtualDub and Avidemux are also rudimentary editors with processing/enhancing capabilities. Many of us use a variety of tools to perform the specific tasks for which each tool excels. There are also issues about stability and such that are not compared in the the wikipedia link.

Speaking of wikipedia, I suppose it is the last word on every subject? Hmmmm?

The quality of a Wiki article based on the quality of its sources/references. The above mentioned softwares are not famous for their stability too... Nowadays many simple converters have similar primitive editing functions too .. Therefore the difference between the above mentioned primitve "editors" and average "transcoders" became more and more slim. (cut merge videos color-filters resizers deinterlacers frame rate converters etc....became very average basic services in 2012)


Forexample: If Xmedia recode (the "transcoder") would introduce the "join video files" function, than it will be far superior than Avidemux (the "editor") in every sense.

[DB83]

This is about Virtualdub vs avidemux. Not other converters.

Flash supports mp4 so you don't need any flv container.

Strears555.

I do love an arguemnt that has nothing to do with the topic. Do read Baldrick's response that I copy again for your convenience.

Maybe you should also read the forum rules about topic-hijacking. IMO it is only by Baldrick's grace and favour that he has allowed this arguement to proceed.

Now be a good boy and if you really need to put your point across find a more suitable topic.

[Stears555]

This is about Virtualdub vs avidemux. Not other converters.

Flash supports mp4 so you don't need any flv container.

Strears555.

I do love an arguemnt that has nothing to do with the topic. Do read Baldrick's response that I copy again for your convenience.

Maybe you should also read the forum rules about topic-hijacking. IMO it is only by Baldrick's grace and favour that he has allowed this arguement to proceed.

Now be a good boy and if you really need to put your point across find a more suitable topic.

These forum was created to help people in their problems with digital videos. (Avi Demuxe and Virtual Dub) only these two programs exist on the planet? Other softwares were banned by somebody in his systems? I would like to help by the propose of better softwares.

[Digmen1]

Thanks guys for all the very detailed replies. (this certainly is a great forum 300 viewing!)

Yes I did think that Baldrick summarized it very well for me.

This thread has put me off trying handbrake and has alerted me to xmedia recode which I had not heard of.
At this stage all I am looking for is a fool proof easy to use converter than can convert most formats to avi with no loss of quality and no sound synch problems.

[hech54]

with no loss of quality

NOT going to happen.

[Stears555]

Thanks guys for all the very detailed replies. (this certainly is a great forum 300 viewing!)

Yes I did think that Baldrick summarized it very well for me.

This thread has put me off trying handbrake and has alerted me to xmedia recode which I had not heard of.
At this stage all I am looking for is a fool proof easy to use converter than can convert most formats to avi with no loss of quality and no sound synch problems.

Xmedia recode is a stable good quality software with direct stream copy technology and much more transcoding options. Moreover: it doesn't produce audio-sync problems and it hasn't so many many bugs a like the the above mentioned "editors".

[Vidd]

I wanted to trim some FLV files and output to mkv. Avidemux 2.6 was the only program I could find that could read the flv files with the correct framerate and output the video and audio in sync. I used the direct stream copy setting and did not have any errors. Avidemux supports avi, flv, mkv, mp4, mpg -- thats all the popular container formats, what is missing?

[hech54]

Xmedia recode is a stable good quality software with direct stream copy technology and much more transcoding options. Moreover: it doesn't produce audio-sync problems and it hasn't so many many bugs a like the the above mentioned "editors".

Then why did you give Xmedia Recode such a poor review and 4 out of 10 for functionality?

Like I said earlier....you really don't know your @§§ from a hole in the ground.

[Stears555]

Xmedia recode is a stable good quality software with direct stream copy technology and much more transcoding options. Moreover: it doesn't produce audio-sync problems and it hasn't so many many bugs a like the the above mentioned "editors".

Then why did you give Xmedia Recode such a poor review and 4 out of 10 for functionality?

[Attachment 15258 - Click to enlarge]
Like I said earlier....you really don't know your @§§ from a hole in the ground.

Xmedia recode has detailed options for h264 encoding, much detailed than competitor softwares. Therefore it can produce better quality videos. Check mate.

[Stears555]

I wanted to trim some FLV files and output to mkv. Avidemux 2.6 was the only program I could find that could read the flv files with the correct framerate and output the video and audio in sync. I used the direct stream copy setting and did not have any errors. Avidemux supports avi, flv, mkv, mp4, mpg -- thats all the popular container formats, what is missing?

Utmost all other softwares support these formats, therefore I can't understand why is it so
particular ?

[hech54]

[Attachment 15258 - Click to enlarge]
Xmedia recode has detailed options for h264 encoding, much detailed than competitor softwares. Therefore it can produce better quality videos. Check mate.

But Xmedia doesn't support the merge and/or cutting of videofiles(Like AviDemux or VirtualDub).
After all....the OP asked about AviDemux and VirtualDub.....both are editors.
If you can't dazzle them with the brilliance, baffle them with the bullshit eh?

[Stears555]

[Attachment 15258 - Click to enlarge]
Xmedia recode has detailed options for h264 encoding, much detailed than competitor softwares. Therefore it can produce better quality videos. Check mate.

But Xmedia doesn't support the merge and/or cutting of videofiles(Like AviDemux or VirtualDub).
After all....the OP asked about AviDemux and VirtualDub.....both are editors.
If you can't dazzle them with the brilliance, baffle them with the bullshit eh?

It seems you didn't try Xmedia recode. It has cutter options.

The fans of the above mentioned amateur converters can't understand the basics of h.264 encoding

[pippas]

I was beginning to think that Stears555 was making some useful points, until I realised that he had given Xmedia recode '7 out of 10' as 'value for money', in his comment on the program.
I mean - how can you put less than 10 out of 10, in 'value for money', for FREEWARE ?

[hech54]

It seems you didn't try Xmedia recode. It has cutter options.

That's impossible. This computer video genius named Stears555 said:

Xmedia doesn't support the merge and/or cutting of videofiles.

.....after all....

Nowadays that would be very important basic expectations

[Stears555]

It seems you didn't try Xmedia recode. It has cutter options.

That's impossible. This computer video genius named Stears555 said:

Xmedia doesn't support the merge and/or cutting of videofiles.

.....after all....

Nowadays that would be very important basic expectations

Perhabs You confused xmedia converter with Xmedia Recode software.

Again the above mentioned softwares are not professional encoders, because they did not support the detailed optimalisation of H.264 codec, therefore they are unable to provide good quality efficient encoding.

With proper optimalisation in Xmedia recode, you can produce similar quality h.264 full HD videos in 8Mbit/s as a 16Mbit / s video with the above mentioned non-professional transcoders/"editors". (at least two times more efficient) They key is: the detailed options for the h.264 encoding in Xmedia recode.