The default template should give good looking encodes at reasonable bitrates, with no fiddling. After extensive testing and evaluations we have settled on 6,000,000 as the new average bitrate because it does look a little better, albeit with a slightly larger file size. If you want to use any other setting, no problem, save as a template and off you go.

Also, we aren't just bumping up the template bitrates and passing that off as an "improved encoder". The encoder itself IS evolving and updates typically pick up the latest improvments if they pass our tests. A number of real-world users give us feedback on each and every MPEG update before release it. The encoder in Vegas 3.0a was a big improvement over the 3.0, and the changes we made were based on feedback/suggestions from several forum contributors. 3.0c should be a positive, if not dramatic step forward.

Broader question: are you happy with your encodes at this time? If not, why not?

I am happy. :-)

Make us jump up and down doing cartwheels, yelling whoopee happy and work on improving rendering times.

I don't own a DVD burner, so my earliest attempts at VCD represent my only forray into the video to disc area. As you might expect, my early results were less than satisfying, and, having reasoned that the DVD area is still in its evolution period, I have held off on jumping into it with new hardware.

I haven't tried any new VCD's lately. Will improvements in VV's MPEG encoder make a difference for me, or am I still spitting in the wind at this point?

My DVD player will not play SVCD's, so, for now, VCD is the only option open to me. Should I continue to bide (as opposed to waste) my time? Will I see any improvements in VCD quality as a result of VV/MPEG evolution, or is DVD hardware the only way to go?

Thanks in advance for any discussion on this matter.

Caruso

Caruso- once you step up to DVD you will never go back. Yes, there's a cost, but it gets lower every day. Burners have come way down, and DVD-r discs can be found all over for 2 bucks.

I'll second that. By their very nature, VCDs will never look all that good, and in fact I find VHS to produce a more pleasing picture (softer, but never any blocky artifacts).

Take a look at www.goroyalpc.com. Someone on this board posted last week that the Pioneer DVD-R/RW drive is now down into the high-$200s, and I believe he mentioned this retailer. I used them back in April to buy the drive for $330, and I was amazed when the box showed up on my doorstep three days after placing the order.

Personally, I would like to see TRUE multipass VBR added as an option. This will be required to get the absolute best quality at the lowest possible bitrate. Currently, getting 2 hours on a DVD gives me good quality. Multipass VBR *could* make it great.

Caruso

If you never take the plunge you will always be waiting for tomorrows technology.
There is already talk of DVDs successor Blu-Ray, so do we wait for that ? When that arrives there will be talk of the next stage of evolution.

You have to ask yourslef, does what you have now serve you purpose ? ** Clearly not**

Can you afford what you want to achieve ? ** That' one you'll have to answer**

If you do decide to jump now then make sure that if it is for your personal use that what ever burner you buy the format supports your player (see www.vcdhelp.com)

If you are looking at distribution +RW/R is the most technologically advanced but -R is the most compatible. (Just because +RW is the most technologically advanced unfortunately doesn't mean it will win out in the end. History teaches us that isn't always the case. On it's side -R has higher compatability & of course the burners & media are cheaper.

I got a HP 200i that supports both DVD +RW and DVD +R. If or not that is the most "advanced" media type I don't know or really care. I do know I'm glad I didn't wait any longer. Like others said, prices are down and dropping, VCD quality compared to DVD quality is like trying to make a video in your closet with only the light of a match compared to taping outdoors.

If you follow discussions elsewhere it seems right now the big players are fairly evenly divided into two camps. I don't see a "standard" coming anytime soon. That just leaves the compatibility issue as to if your DVD disc can play in X players or only Y players. Quality wise I've seen both and you can't tell. At least I can't.

I'm pretty happy with the quality of the MPEG2 solution with VV30a. I really need to be getting 90 minutes of video to DVD, but in most cases, I'm just a bit over the file size that Sonic DVDit! PE allows me to burn to a DVD-R using the MPEG2 files cretaed from VV30a at 6MB average during the encoding. So, I have settled on a 5MB average to safely fit all of my videos onto DVD. I've seen the results at 6MB and really like it.

Yesterday I found an option in Sonic DVDit! that allows me to change the audio to Dolby Digital 2/0 Stereo. Using their built in calculator, this change allows me to fit a 15% larger file onto DVD. Therefore, I may be able to create my 6MB average MPEG2 file from VV30a with PCM audio, then bring it into DVDit! and have it change my file to Dolby Digital 2/0 Stereo so my resulting 6MB MPEG2 file may fit on a 90 minute DVD. I need to verify this more, but after I burned a DVD-R with the Dolby Digital 2/0 setting, sure enough, my Sony DVD player recognized Dolby Digital 2/0!

If I can verify that this solution works well for me, I'd like to ask SF if they will add the feature of create a Dolby Digital 2.0 stereo file during the render process.

Any input on this? Is it safer to stay with PCM audio rather than Dolby Digital 2/0 for compatibility issues with set top DVD players?

Thanks,
Ron

The DVD standard says that audio must be either PCM, Dolby Digital, or DTS for NTSC countries. Any will be fine. For that matter, it appears that most DVD players are equally happy playing audio encoded in MP2, a format that provides similar compression and performance to Dolby. But keep in mind that the official spec doesn't support MP2 (for NTSC counries).

Dolby supposedly charges a substantial licensing fee for the use of its encoder, which is why you don't see many software products offering this encoding option. There is a product called SoftEncode that will take wav files and convert them into Dolby AC3 (2 channel up to 5.1 channel) but it apparently has been pulled off the official market. I have seen it at various places on the Internet, however.

There appears to be another way of encoding Dolby Digital which I saw over at www.doom9.org. It uses a freeware product called "AC3 Machine" and takes an MP2 audio file and converts it over to AC3. I know nothing else about it.

> The DVD standard says that audio must be either PCM, Dolby Digital, or DTS for NTSC countries.

Actually, I believe the US DVD standard says that discs must have at least one PCM or Dolby Digital stream. It may also have addition streams that are PCM, DD, or DTS. Players are required to decode at least PCM and DD (at least in stereo). They may also decode DD at higher levels (like 5.1) and/or DTS, and they may also route the audio, encoded as PCM, DD, or DTS, to the coax or optical digital audio out ports, for decoding in an external device, such as a surround sound receiver.

All legal AC3 (Dolby Digital) encoders have to pay a license to Dolby. SoftEncode did, which is mainly why it cost so much, and why there were 2 channel and 6 channel versions (per pay by the channel count).

///d@