Avatar Collector's Extended Edition x265 32 Minute Test Sample (2009) 1080p 5.1 BrRip x265 HEVC - Judas

Stuck at 0 for way to long for me. I will have to wait till there are more seeders. Sorry up-loader.

Sorry after having it uploaded for over a month, being just a test sample... added in with my lack of 100% online connection, I personally couldn't keep this seeded, and it appears those that had gotten it are no longer interested in keeping it seeded. It is afterall just a test sample for a specific forum thread..

I'll see if I can get reseeded, but I may have to just dump it.

you could upload to site and stop seeding

We love ya, Judas. Doesn't have to be a new movie... anyone you want to rip and upload is very much appreciated!

all new movies are on hold until I can afford them.... i'm flat busted broke...

First part of what you said: Yes mp3 is inferior to AAC, and AC-3 is an OLD and ultra lossy format.

The links you've provided really don't prove anything specially with the source material and citation being from when AAC was first arriving. This is all relatively well known.

The Second part clearly shows where Nero is quite terrible... @ 96kbps.... but we aren't talking about 96kbps....

You've completely ignored a number of fundamentals.

You've linked really to nothing that has anything to do with what we are talking about.

This isn't STEREO (2 channel) stuff, this is 6 channel or better.

We need apples to apples comparisons. Something a number of us thoroughly exhausted in the forums of this site earlier.
Having used all the AAC encoders available, from Apples's QAAC encoder through to ffmpegs (imo horrible) encoder to Nero's and so forth, I've yet to see one do relatively good results.

Lets also consider the fact that human hearing for the vast majority mostly falls off at 15-18khz...

Here's a 6 Channel SOURCE material..

http://imageshack.us/a/img34/6870/0l5b.png

Heres what HE-AAC/LC looks like @ 192kbps
http://imageshack.us/a/img27/1007/eti6.png

Here's what AAC/LC looks like @ 256kbps
http://imageshack.us/a/img547/807/epm7.jpg

Having gone and used apples QAAC's encoder, Encoding to 6 channel or higher has been rather unpredictable and in most of my testing equally as poor. In fact Apple's QAAC encoder has had issues with mapping 6 channel audio properly not to mention output on some devices are really messed up. I'm not entirely surprised by this as apple still can't even make a proper media player (iTunes/quicktime) that treats proper Mp4 standards for Multiple audio tracks playback properly.

FFMPEGs AAC encoder is just pure trash even if you use the experimental version.

All around the results are pretty much identical to the above results.

AC-3 gives the best bang for the buck for it's bitrate and for maximum bitstream capability, not to mention it's overall very well supported downmixing to stereo. (testing again was involved)

you end up with something like this for 384kbps AC-3.. http://i.imgur.com/IiOjtNG.png

Further analysis of the encoded results can be put through much more detailed spectrum and audio quality analyzers which confirm basically everything I've stated thus far.

You can find more of this discussion here ~> http://kat.cm/community/show/yify-vs-other-encoders-resolution-vs-bitrate-discussion/

even talk to an audio engineer if you like.

A spectrum does not necessarily speak for the actual audio quality. You should do some abx'es to support your claims. Lossy codecs are, after all, ment to manipulate+remove information in order to make it sound close to the original. ABX'es i've done gives me the impression QAAC is in lead of AC3 regardig quality.

But since you are into experimenting with new formats: Have you tried Opus audio codec yet? :) It should be able to give you even lower bitrates than aac and ac3 with same quality. MKVtoolnix can mux it, VLC will support it in 2.2 releases.

Opus 1.1 demo: http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/opus/demo3.shtml
Opus inside mkv in VLC: https://trac.videolan.org/vlc/ticket/7785
Download of opus encoder: https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/opus/win32/
TAudioConverter: http://taudioconverter.sourceforge.net/downloads.html (Audio converter with LOADS of codecs, functions etc)

this has been gone over...

2014-02-05 19:13

I understand. Opus will be a universally supported audio format, or at least it looks like its gonna be. But yeah, might be too early to use it yet, agreed.

But off course, thanks for the sample! I've been eager to try out x265 :)

Every decent software player already supports opus and HEVC/VP9 too.
If not there are free codecs available like LAV Filters for windows.

Anyway. If you're thinking of the future audio-wise Opus is should be considered, as much as HEVC for video.

Thank you very much for doing a good quality x265 sample! Tbh Judas, I compared this to your lq avatar and the difference is almost imperceptible! Though it looked as if for long range shots the x265 was a bit better, but up close faces/equipment appeared to have been sharper with the x264.

I don't know if my perception is accurate though.

my lq version has a higher bitrate..... not much.. but a little which can in some circumstances give it a clear edge in VERY specific cases.

2014-02-02 04:09

To me, this is a nice eye-opener Judas. As I don't encode or use big rar-files etc., an I3 is enough for me, combined with an Ati 6670 for some virtual racing, why pay for more;). The CPU is indeed stressing now for the very first time, with an average use of 60%-98% cpu-power.
Kind regards and thanks again,



Problems with VLC?
If your VLC player is only playing the sound, but not the video, update the VLC player to the latest version to fix it.

thanks a lot for test sample
its looks very good and plays very well on my pc
I have encoded it to h264 with Zeranoe's FFmpeg Build
it exported h265 to h264 with libx264
and the output x264 file has a video bitrate of 4289kbps and size is 955 mb
considering that , sharing a 4289 kbps worth x264 file with 2150 kbps x265 video (almost half the size ) is really awesome
so please think about doing x265 encodes mate

I've gone over this exhaustively..

2014-02-02 03:37

i totally agree. based on my personal hearing tests, on the same bitrate and same source, AC3 is far more better and efficient than AAC.

2014-02-03 19:56

If you're using a state of the art poorly supported video format you could also do that with audio. I'm thinking of opus mostly. So far it seems it outperforms all earlier codecs quality wise, while being low latency(which was the main design goal).
It's also expected to be widely supported, because website usage, and "patent-free-ness" was also one of the goals.

Edit:
I see now, that someone already mentioned it.