iTunes HD vs Handbrake x264 RF20

[hogger129]

Hello everyone,

I am curious which one you prefer in terms of subjective quality. I have been doing some conversions to .mkv/x264 RF20/AC3 5.1 640kbps and am curious what you guys think of the quality of your own rips vs buying compressed HD downloads from iTunes. Is there anything that the compressed HD downloads do better compared to just ripping and converting the content yourself? FWIW, my file sizes come out a little larger than what iTunes HD 1080p is offering, but I think my own conversions look far and away better. What do you guys think?

Thanks.

[smitbret]

It's not "Apples" to "Apples" <wink>.

Both use h264 as the encoding standard which means that with identical settings there should be no apparent difference at the same size. However, iTunes files have to possess an expected quality while maintaining compatibility across a number of devices. If I use Handbrake I can use aggressive settings that many devices may not support and that's a luxury that iTunes doesn't have. With Handbrake, I can encode at RF 20 with basic settings and have it done in 1 hour or I can use some aggressive settings in the advanced tab and it will take 14 hours but will look 10% better. But when I try to play that file back on my iPod it won't work at all because I enabled CABAC and it won't support the 16 reference frames.

Could I use Handbrake to make a similar sized file with better quality than iTunes? Absolutely. Would it work on as many different devices? Probably not.