Is Matroska the be all, end all?

[Emancipated]

I know pretty much nothing about this new format but from what I've seen, it could give stuff out there a serious run for its money. I compared it to Blu-Ray 1080P with 720P MKV and the difference is pretty negligible. MKV is so sick looking!

It looks like the "groups" like using this to rip Blu-Ray 1080p so I take it it will be the format to reign for the next few years? Compression isn't bad either. HIDEF for 4GB of storage isn't a bad trade off.

Question: is there any better compression to get it to go even better than 4GB? For instance, MP4 (Apple TV format) using VisualHub can do a "passable" conversion of 720P to 2GB. Matroska has slightly better visual and audio at double the space.

[willy]

MKV itself is not a compression method ... It's basically a container (think of it as a package) which holds video, audio, subtitles components inside to make up a 'movie' ... The compression method for the video stream they normally use is x.264. You can add/remove several audio streams as well as subtitle files in the 'package'.

The video & audio quality varies and it depends on the level of bitrate used during the recoding ... To me, 720p looks good at the DVD9 level and 1080p looks good at 12-13GB size to have decent visual quality.

[ShadowVlican]

though i have to say matroska does it all

i don't know why people still choose to use avi or mp4 container... perhaps they still have obsolete equipment (ie: divx standalones)

[board123]

I'd say Matroska is the best container right now. The option to embed chapters into the container is what really puts it over the top for me.

[napoleon1769]

But the PS3 doesn't play it.

[balou911]

for any hd content, dvd9 mkv files are the way to go.

[marcopolo85]

What is the best way to go to play a file currently Matroska on the ps3?
Ive tried converting the mkv to a vob which from what i understand is supported by the ps3 but nothing comes up when i burn in to a dual layer disc and play on the ps3.

edit:
Also the mkv file is approx 7.6 gigs and when I convert to vob it becomes around 6gigs. Is it supposed to get that much smaller in file size? and yes i am a noob so plz bare with me.

[board123]

You folks should go learn some stuff about codecs before pondering these questions...

[rilhouse]

What is the best way to go to play a file currently Matroska on the ps3?
Ive tried converting the mkv to a vob which from what i understand is supported by the ps3 but nothing comes up when i burn in to a dual layer disc and play on the ps3.

edit:
Also the mkv file is approx 7.6 gigs and when I convert to vob it becomes around 6gigs. Is it supposed to get that much smaller in file size? and yes i am a noob so plz bare with me.

try using gotsent, it's easy and works most of the time but the audio quality isn't great.

[rabbit]

> i don't know why people still choose to use avi or mp4 container... perhaps they still have obsolete equipment (ie: divx standalones)

The same reason why people still prefer MP3s. MKV is not universally compatible.

Obsolete ... LOL ...

[rilhouse]

though i have to say matroska does it all

i don't know why people still choose to use avi or mp4 container... perhaps they still have obsolete equipment (ie: divx standalones)

divx obsolete? LOL

1 reason people use the avi/mp4 container instead of mkv is that both PS3/Xbox360 support those containers and not mkv.

[silentio]

xvid and divx is here to stay. None of the manufacturers seem serious about adding a processor able to decode a mkv file.

You're truly dreaming if you think mkv will become a standard off a computer.

There was a time (4 years ago)when ppl thought 3 point GMC support would arrive and all divx files could be played on standalone. That never happened.

Manufacturers are still using the old mediatek chipset that came out 4 years ago.

[Badman]

What is the best way to go to play a file currently Matroska on the ps3?
Ive tried converting the mkv to a vob which from what i understand is supported by the ps3 but nothing comes up when i burn in to a dual layer disc and play on the ps3.

edit:
Also the mkv file is approx 7.6 gigs and when I convert to vob it becomes around 6gigs. Is it supposed to get that much smaller in file size? and yes i am a noob so plz bare with me.

Use MKV2VOB the newer versions have really gone a long way. But as always you should really try a sample file first before you do the who movie and possibly waste a dvd9. Another thing is that MVK2VOB has some problems with 1080P content.

Also I think the file is supposed to come out bigger. Not by much but that 7.6GB might become 7.8GB.

Ohh and IMO MKV with H.264 is the best combination right now.

[sfu_lifer]

> i don't know why people still choose to use avi or mp4 container... perhaps they still have obsolete equipment (ie: divx standalones)

The same reason why people still prefer MP3s. MKV is not universally compatible.

Obsolete ... LOL ...

Exactly. I'd like the person who called current containers obsolete provide a standalone player that plays HD mkv content.

[Haz]

xvid and divx is here to stay. None of the manufacturers seem serious about adding a processor able to decode a mkv file.

You're truly dreaming if you think mkv will become a standard off a computer.

There was a time (4 years ago)when ppl thought 3 point GMC support would arrive and all divx files could be played on standalone. That never happened.

Manufacturers are still using the old mediatek chipset that came out 4 years ago.There are a few units that are either read from a hard drive or through a LAN out there that will do MKV with the Sigma SMP8635 chip. Not a cheap chip.

Popcorn Hour and Tommacro has units that play MKV and I think TviX does as well. Maybe there will something like the Helio X5000 (http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=27976&vpn=X5000&manufacture=Helios) with MKV support. I wouldn't rule out a standalone player that will do the majority of the MKVs out there.

[ShadowVlican]

> i don't know why people still choose to use avi or mp4 container... perhaps they still have obsolete equipment (ie: divx standalones)

The same reason why people still prefer MP3s. MKV is not universally compatible.

Obsolete ... LOL ...
divx obsolete? LOL

1 reason people use the avi/mp4 container instead of mkv is that both PS3/Xbox360 support those containers and not mkv.
xvid and divx is here to stay. None of the manufacturers seem serious about adding a processor able to decode a mkv file.

You're truly dreaming if you think mkv will become a standard off a computer.

There was a time (4 years ago)when ppl thought 3 point GMC support would arrive and all divx files could be played on standalone. That never happened.

Manufacturers are still using the old mediatek chipset that came out 4 years ago.
Exactly. I'd like the person who called current containers obsolete provide a standalone player that plays HD mkv content.
and that's why you're all DOING IT WRONG

why should i be locked into a hardware component that cannot be updated to play new formats (or heck, even older formats with 'extra' features, like the GMC support silentio mentioned)

HTPC.

Ultra portable laptop.

those who cheap out with divx/xvid standalones, PS3, ipods, etc... too bad :P

but there's hope for you people.... computers are getting faster! quad core processors can re-encode your unsupported formats into supported formats for your crappy hardware! (maybe if you bug sony enough, they'll support more filetypes and codecs... the PS3 certainly has the muscle for it.. keep bugging them :lol:)

flame on. :twisted:

[board123]

It's not about decoding capabilities. You don't have to have high resolution video streams inside an MKV. It can hold anything. Plenty of MKV files hold standard definition H264, or even Xvid.

I think the argument is that MKV is an open source container that doesn't really follow any official standard, so hardware isn't designed to support it.

[ShadowVlican]

of course not

it's about matroska as a whole.. if a divx standalone can't demux mkv, it won't play divx!

there is a standard, just not from the ISO (i think)

there are many other reasons why MKV hasn't caught on

[tebore]

and that's why you're all DOING IT WRONG...

flame on. :twisted:

As much as I agree with what you're saying. A few things.

A LOT Of people buy those 19.99 DVD players that play DIVX. Most computers out there are like those 4 year old MDG $499 specials with 2.2 Cellys.

Most computers consumers get today are like 2.2 Dual core (non-C2D) with integrated video.

Those laptops and HTPCs you're talking about are like >$1500 that will play 1080P streams and sound smoothly.

Most consumer level stuff is really underpowered to decode or encode(with in a reasonable amount of time) properly. I still remember when the first AXP came out and DVIX was brand new it took ages to go from DVD to AVI.

[ShadowVlican]

As much as I agree with what you're saying. A few things.

A LOT Of people buy those 19.99 DVD players that play DIVX. Most computers out there are like those 4 year old MDG $499 specials with 2.2 Cellys.

Most computers consumers get today are like 2.2 Dual core (non-C2D) with integrated video.

Those laptops and HTPCs you're talking about are like >$1500 that will play 1080P streams and sound smoothly.

Most consumer level stuff is really underpowered to decode or encode(with in a reasonable amount of time) properly. I still remember when the first AXP came out and DVIX was brand new it took ages to go from DVD to AVI.
yeap... and they get what they pay for! a POS that confines them to crappy firmware updates... putting them at the mercy of the manufacturer!

an old system like mine (3800+x2, 7300GT) can easily handle 720P h.264 avc1 blahblahblah (and does so without the help of a graphics card)... and doesn't cost $499

want 1080P bluray/hddvd? the new graphics cards from ATI and NVIDIA does most of the processing, so a lousy dual core like mine should suffice (i don't know the actual numbers, board123 or willy might though)

want 1080P stuffed into MKV? increase that CPU cost to $250 and it should handle everything out there... plus i'm told they're making progress to include hardware processing for MKV files

doing it the RIGHT way doesn't cost as much as you think! :cheesygri

[board123]

want 1080P bluray/hddvd? the new graphics cards from ATI and NVIDIA does most of the processing, so a lousy dual core like mine should suffice (i don't know the actual numbers, board123 or willy might though)
The cheapest HD3000 series can decode 1080p H264 with no problems using a slow dual-core (eg. X2 4200+). In fact that's the "official" video testbed's CPU at ATI. The noise processing and overall picture quality improve as you spend more money on the video card though, so don't expect amazing video quality out of a $50 video card if you're using it for decoding videos.

[Emancipated]

Regarding the MP3 vs all argument and how it relates to MKV, if you search around for the new releases, they're in MKV. As long as the groups keep releasing them in MKV I'll be happy. The AppleTV can be hacked to handle it, so there's no problem there either.

I just wanted to probe the people who do know what exactly is comparable in quality. I can encode movies in MP4 and up the quality settings but it's a redundancy that I rather avoid.

[sfu_lifer]

It'll take a few years but I do think mkv will catch on (I don't see how it cannot). Most scene releasers use it. Until we see everyone's mom downloading HD mkv movies, no way divx/xvid are obsolete in the eyes of many :cheesygri
It took a while for xvid/divx to get into standard DVD players, it'll take quite a while for manufacturers to get it into something cheap and disposable. I think Archos will be one of the leaders here ;)

[board123]

I just wanted to probe the people who do know what exactly is comparable in quality. I can encode movies in MP4 and up the quality settings but it's a redundancy that I rather avoid.
As people have already said, MKV and MP4 are not codecs. You don't encode stuff in MKV or MP4. They're containers, and containers have nothing to do with the quality of the streams inside.

Think of them like cardboard boxes. The box itself has nothing to do with what you put in. You can put whatever you want in the box. However, different boxes have different shapes and sizes, allowing you to put different kinds of stuff inside. Is a heavy duty box better than a thin small box? Well, it gives you more freedom in what you're allowed to put in, but consequentially it's harder to handle. Is what you put into the big box better than what you put in the small box? No, because that depends solely on the quality of the object you're putting in and nothing else.

Boxes of chocolates are not chocolates. They contain chocolates. The chocolate factory does not manufacture the boxes that hold them.

box = container (AVI, MKV, MP4, OGM)
chocolate = codec (MPEG-2, MPEG-4, AVC)
chocolate factory = encoder (DivX, Xvid, x264, ffmpeg)
packaging = muxer (Virtualdub, mkvmerge)

[df329]

But the PS3 doesn't play it.

mkv2vob ;)

same file size / qualtiy - plays on ps3 :D

[df329]

box = container (AVI, MKV, MP4, OGM)
chocolate = codec (MPEG-2, MPEG-4, AVC)
chocolate factory = encoder (DivX, Xvid, x264, ffmpeg)
packaging = muxer (Virtualdub, mkvmerge)

best analogy ever :lol:

[rilhouse]

and that's why you're all DOING IT WRONG

why should i be locked into a hardware component that cannot be updated to play new formats (or heck, even older formats with 'extra' features, like the GMC support silentio mentioned)

HTPC.

Ultra portable laptop.

those who cheap out with divx/xvid standalones, PS3, ipods, etc... too bad :P

but there's hope for you people.... computers are getting faster! quad core processors can re-encode your unsupported formats into supported formats for your crappy hardware! (maybe if you bug sony enough, they'll support more filetypes and codecs... the PS3 certainly has the muscle for it.. keep bugging them :lol:)

flame on. :twisted:

obviously a htpc is the ideal solution, no one argued that. the fact is that most people don't wan't to spend the $ on a htpc (i assume your looking at the 1000$ mark for a decent setup). they already have a PS3/360 for gaming, and they certainly have the muscle for HD.

it's too bad that all formats are not supported but there is hope that MS/sony will support additional formats in the future. even if they don't if/when the consoles are hacked fully, we will have everything we need. i would take XBMC on 360 over a htpc any day.

that being said, i'm planning on building a htpc within 1 year unless the 360 is hacked to run unsigned code before that.

[ShadowVlican]

yes of course... no one will argue that PC trumps all when it comes to media playback

yet they still whine about incompatibilities everyday.... check video software forums for your dose of wine and cheese :lol:

yes.. it'd be nice if PS3/360 can playback all these formats.. they certainly have the muscle... (heck, even i thought about buying an xbox waaaaayyy back just because of XBMC!)

but now is a great time for HTPC... the video front has some great cards out finally for the HTPC crowd... the CPU front has some CHEAP dual cores... RAM is CHEAP ER than ever... so until then, you're under the mercy of M$/Sony

[silentio]

Last I recall, mediatek announced with great fanfare 3 years ago hardware support for mkv.

Has it happened? Suddenly nobody's talking about that and I havent seen a single machine with a mediatek capable of doing this.

[yatta]

I have a media file .mkv I searched for hrs on my issue, I can't get the audio to work, the picture shows fine, but no audio. I used VLC , I installed plugins, codecs packs, you name it. when I install the packs then nothing happens. i remove them I get picture again, great crisp picture, but no audio. I searched googled for along time and tried what was suggested and nothing works. Anyone had a issue like this and solved it?:mad:

[sfu_lifer]

I have a media file .mkv I searched for hrs on my issue, I can't get the audio to work, the picture shows fine, but no audio. I used VLC , I installed plugins, codecs packs, you name it. when I install the packs then nothing happens. i remove them I get picture again, great crisp picture, but no audio. I searched googled for along time and tried what was suggested and nothing works. Anyone had a issue like this and solved it?:mad:

You're obviously missing a needed but obscure audio codec which probably isn't in any of the packs or your sound card may not like playing AC3/5.1 audio. Try this, http://avicodec.duby.info/ to identify what the codecs the mkv file is using.

[rabbit]

> Last I recall, mediatek announced with great fanfare 3 years ago hardware support for mkv.

Has it happened? Suddenly nobody's talking about that and I havent seen a single machine with a mediatek capable of doing this.


Probably because MKV is obsolete now that Blu-ray won the HD war. Why DL MKV when you can download BR-D images?

<jk>

[willy]

I would say MKV will be obsolete when BD-R discs become affordable ... and I don't see it happen in the foreseeable future ...

[board123]

Why would MKV be obsolete when people can afford BR-D? MKV is a container, BR-D is physical media. When you download an H264 encode off the internet, you're probably getting it in an MKV format. You're not downloading from the internet straight to a BR-D. Plus, why does it have to be BR-D? What's special about BR-D? Nothing. A container (software) and recordable media (hardware) are unrelated items when you're talking about one making the other obsolete.

MKV is used for all sorts of videos distributed over the internet, not just HD content, so everyone should stop treating it like it is. In fact, MKV was developed before this whole HD gimmick started a couple years ago. It just happens that most of the HD content on the web is encoded in H264, and MKV is the favorite container for that because it can properly handle VBR Vorbis audio streams while AVI can't. Contrary to popular belief, MKV actually became popular because it can handle VBR audio streams while legacy containers like AVI are somewhat restricted to CBR streams and other restrictions. It had very little to do with video.

[willy]

One (or argubly the most important) reason MKV has become quite popular is that it has been used to contain HDrip 720p and 1080p video/movie files.

Full Bluray/HD-DVD movie rips are also 'available' ... however, they are usually in the 25GB+ size. Most users do not have the means to back them up onto any optical media for their personal collections. This forces most of them collect the 'next best thing' - 1080p/720p HDrip - which 90% are packaged in MKV format. And their sizes are often fits nicely on a DVD5 or DVD9.

If BD-R becomes a affordable alternative to DVD5/9, users do not have to live with the 'next best thing' anymore and go for the full rip. And the 'demand' of MKV will be lower ... I guess it won't be obsolete but just less popular ...

[board123]

One (or argubly the most important) reason MKV has become quite popular is that it has been used to contain HDrip 720p and 1080p video/movie files.
No, the most important reason MKV caught on was due to anime distribution. MKV was competing with OGM back in the day for multi-audio stream releases. Its ability to hold multiple video, audio and subtitle streams as well as chapters. Like I said already, MKV was already popular before people started to release HD-rips on the internet.

If BD-R becomes a affordable alternative to DVD5/9, users do not have to live with the 'next best thing' anymore and go for the full rip. And the 'demand' of MKV will be lower ... I guess it won't be obsolete but just less popular ...
As long as anime is popular, MKV will not become obsolete until something comes along that requires features that MKV doesn't or can't provide. Even today, MKV is still predominantly used for anime. HD-rips only make up a relatively small fraction of all the MKV files being distributed.

[sfu_lifer]

No, the most important reason MKV caught on was due to anime distribution. MKV was competing with OGM back in the day for multi-audio stream releases. Its ability to hold multiple video, audio and subtitle streams as well as chapters. Like I said already, MKV was already popular before people started to release HD-rips on the internet.


As long as anime is popular, MKV will not become obsolete until something comes along that requires features that MKV doesn't or can't provide. Even today, MKV is still predominantly used for anime. HD-rips only make up a relatively small fraction of all the MKV files being distributed.
Very true. Anime led the way to mkv appeal long before HD rips became available. Subs seemed to be the main initial reason.

[Badman]

One (or argubly the most important) reason MKV has become quite popular is that it has been used to contain HDrip 720p and 1080p video/movie files.

Full Bluray/HD-DVD movie rips are also 'available' ... however, they are usually in the 25GB+ size. Most users do not have the means to back them up onto any optical media for their personal collections. This forces most of them collect the 'next best thing' - 1080p/720p HDrip - which 90% are packaged in MKV format. And their sizes are often fits nicely on a DVD5 or DVD9.

If BD-R becomes a affordable alternative to DVD5/9, users do not have to live with the 'next best thing' anymore and go for the full rip. And the 'demand' of MKV will be lower ... I guess it won't be obsolete but just less popular ...

I could see what your trying to mean but then another argument would be if people are willing to download 25GB+ for just one movie, when you could get very comparable quality with MKV.

It's the same thing thats going on right now. they still release 700MB rips and most people download that even though the DVD-R is available. Most people would just look at which is the best way to get the best quality for the size.

BTW: I'm not trying to back those 700MB rips. I think people should start looking for higher quality material. (but then again another argument could be with all these ISP's with their bandwidth cap :lol: )

[ShadowVlican]

rips will always be more popular than images willy

just because bluray discs become cheaper doesn't mean scene groups will stop releasing in MKV

it's happened with DVDs (*.AVI > *.ISO or wutever image format) and will happen with bluray

therefore popularity:
MKV files > ISO files

[dmdsoftware2]

I would say MKV will be obsolete when BD-R discs become affordable ... and I don't see it happen in the foreseeable future ...

Divx didn't become obsolete when DVD-Rs became affordable.

Divx actually became more popular as now people could fit 7+ movies on 1 disc.

The same will be true with MKV. Instead of 1 highly compressed DVD9 movie, people will be enjoying multiple 12-15GB movies on a single BD-R.

[s1301950]

just checked apple tv, with support it supports 1080p. However, for 1080p mkv releases currently, are at least l4.1. Some even l5.1. So apple tv is out of the question. You might wanta turn to popcorn hour, tvix, istar mini. They all use the same chipset for mkv. But even then, they don't support everything. For example L5.1 is not supported.

BTW, 1080p releases are catchin up and they are ~10gigs instead 20+ gigs as some of you points out. Personally, if i'm going for HD, i really wouldn't bother with 720p. It's either 1080p or 480i from the SD dvdr releases.

Another note is that you don't have to use mkvs, there are wmvhd, which is another competing format that the scene is using. Although much less adapted, probably because it's microsoft or maybe it doesn't have sub support, etc.

As far as bluray disc is concerned, even when the discs and the burner drop to reasonable price range, i don't think anyone would start to do 1:1 copy (after removing protection) because there really are a lot of junk in BD right now (special materials, commentary, and those audiophile-crazed dts-hd ma, or dd truehd) It's just like now, the standard dvdr releases are removing almost everything but dts5.1 and subs) Special features are reserved for dvd DL releases and those are only out for really big feature films like kingkongs or starwars because for regular chicks films, people really don't care.

[dmdsoftware2]

just checked apple tv, with support it supports 1080p. However, for 1080p mkv releases currently, are at least l4.1. Some even l5.1. So apple tv is out of the question. You might wanta turn to popcorn hour, tvix, istar mini. They all use the same chipset for mkv. But even then, they don't support everything. For example L5.1 is not supported.


The level is easy to change. Use h264info to change it without needing to re-encode.

[rabbit]

> Divx actually became more popular as now people could fit 7+ movies on 1 disc.

The same will be true with MKV. Instead of 1 highly compressed DVD9 movie, people will be enjoying multiple 12-15GB movies on a single BD-R.


Not if standalone players don't support MKV/codecs.

[sulk]

The scene follows rulesets, so that releases are standardized and to make sure that the release meets a certain agreed qualitly level.

Right now the mkv container is the standard for pretty much anything HD, so thats why scene releases are using that format.

Until a better container comes along, with something that mkv cant offer, mkv will be around for a long time.

Full iso/video_ts~ releases will always be around, because theyre easy for people to make, and relatively low tech. Its just a matter of burning it to a dvd, and they should work.

Sure, like people have said, when bluray becomes an affordable option, there may will be a rise in full 1080p, uncompressed video, but compressed mkv will still be there.

People will always want a compressed, smaller file, for whatever reason (isp, space issues, burning, whatever)
And because of that there probably will always be a compressed release, and right now, thats mkv with 720p content.