TMPGEnc vs Main Concept

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

For a while now I've been rendering from Vegas to AVI then using TMPGEnc to
make MPG2 for DVD. I had forgotten that I can go from Vegas directly to DVD
MPG2 and save myself a step. I believe it uses the Main Concept encoder.

Does anyone have an opinion of whether one is significantly better than the
other.

Thanks,
WH
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

i get varied resutls with both.

the advantage for me with main concept is it utilises dual cpu so is a lot
quicker then tmpgenc.

the disadvantage with main concept is that it APPEARS to drop a frame every
3 or so seconds, giving a stop/start look. A lot of people i have burnt
stuff for using main concept have never noticed this, maybe it is just me?


"WH" <user@server.com> wrote in message
news:WSJdc.26194$YC5.18761@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> For a while now I've been rendering from Vegas to AVI then using TMPGEnc
to
> make MPG2 for DVD. I had forgotten that I can go from Vegas directly to
DVD
> MPG2 and save myself a step. I believe it uses the Main Concept encoder.
>
> Does anyone have an opinion of whether one is significantly better than
the
> other.
>
> Thanks,
> WH
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"KW_UK" <karl.woolley@no.spam.btinternet.com> schreef in bericht
news:c58ij9$2q6fnb$1@ID-224630.news.uni-berlin.de...
> i get varied resutls with both.
>
> the advantage for me with main concept is it utilises dual cpu so is a lot
> quicker then tmpgenc.

TMPGEnc uses hyperthreading and >1 logical processor too but Mainconcept is
indeed a lot faster than TMPGEnc.

> the disadvantage with main concept is that it APPEARS to drop a frame
every
> 3 or so seconds, giving a stop/start look. A lot of people i have burnt
> stuff for using main concept have never noticed this, maybe it is just me?

I suppose this is something in your setup. I never experienced this and it
is the first time I heard of it.

I use the Mainconcept encoder as a plugin (callex MPEG XS) in editing
program EditStudio 4 from www.puremotion.com. I have been using TMPGEnc for
a long time and I know how to tweak it but my results with Mainconcept are
visibly better. Finer detail and less (no) artifacts.
--
Lou van Wijhe
jl.vanwijhe@hccnet.nl
AntiSpam: Om me te mailen, plaats een punt tussen "van" en "wijhe"
AntiSpam: For mailing me put a full stop between "van" and "wijhe"


> "WH" <user@server.com> wrote in message
> news:WSJdc.26194$YC5.18761@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> > For a while now I've been rendering from Vegas to AVI then using TMPGEnc
> to
> > make MPG2 for DVD. I had forgotten that I can go from Vegas directly to
> DVD
> > MPG2 and save myself a step. I believe it uses the Main Concept
encoder.
> >
> > Does anyone have an opinion of whether one is significantly better than
> the
> > other.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > WH
> >
> >
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

I would have guessed that TMPGenc was better based on a few simple
tests...but the difference was very small. Main Concept is definately
faster though as you have said.

I'm using Vegas v3.0c and MainConcept MPG-2 File Format Plug-in Version 1.0
(Build 49). Is there a newer version of the encoder? Can it be updated?


"Lou van Wijhe" <jl.vanwijhe@hccnet.nl> wrote in message
news:40783beb$0$135$3a628fcd@reader2.nntp.hccnet.nl...
> "KW_UK" <karl.woolley@no.spam.btinternet.com> schreef in bericht
> news:c58ij9$2q6fnb$1@ID-224630.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > i get varied resutls with both.
> >
> > the advantage for me with main concept is it utilises dual cpu so is a
lot
> > quicker then tmpgenc.
>
> TMPGEnc uses hyperthreading and >1 logical processor too but Mainconcept
is
> indeed a lot faster than TMPGEnc.
>
> > the disadvantage with main concept is that it APPEARS to drop a frame
> every
> > 3 or so seconds, giving a stop/start look. A lot of people i have burnt
> > stuff for using main concept have never noticed this, maybe it is just
me?
>
> I suppose this is something in your setup. I never experienced this and it
> is the first time I heard of it.
>
> I use the Mainconcept encoder as a plugin (callex MPEG XS) in editing
> program EditStudio 4 from www.puremotion.com. I have been using TMPGEnc
for
> a long time and I know how to tweak it but my results with Mainconcept are
> visibly better. Finer detail and less (no) artifacts.
> --
> Lou van Wijhe
> jl.vanwijhe@hccnet.nl
> AntiSpam: Om me te mailen, plaats een punt tussen "van" en "wijhe"
> AntiSpam: For mailing me put a full stop between "van" and "wijhe"
>
>
> > "WH" <user@server.com> wrote in message
> > news:WSJdc.26194$YC5.18761@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> > > For a while now I've been rendering from Vegas to AVI then using
TMPGEnc
> > to
> > > make MPG2 for DVD. I had forgotten that I can go from Vegas directly
to
> > DVD
> > > MPG2 and save myself a step. I believe it uses the Main Concept
> encoder.
> > >
> > > Does anyone have an opinion of whether one is significantly better
than
> > the
> > > other.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > WH
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

I'd like to know if someone can post the settings they used in both TMPGEnc
and MainConcept. I use both and MainConcept that comes with Adobe Premiere
Pro seems slower and I think I have it configured similarly. Any help would
be appreciated.

"WH" <user@server.com> wrote in message
news:TNYdc.55989$z%1.46606@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> I would have guessed that TMPGenc was better based on a few simple
> tests...but the difference was very small. Main Concept is definately
> faster though as you have said.
>
> I'm using Vegas v3.0c and MainConcept MPG-2 File Format Plug-in Version
1.0
> (Build 49). Is there a newer version of the encoder? Can it be updated?
>
>
> "Lou van Wijhe" <jl.vanwijhe@hccnet.nl> wrote in message
> news:40783beb$0$135$3a628fcd@reader2.nntp.hccnet.nl...
> > "KW_UK" <karl.woolley@no.spam.btinternet.com> schreef in bericht
> > news:c58ij9$2q6fnb$1@ID-224630.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > > i get varied resutls with both.
> > >
> > > the advantage for me with main concept is it utilises dual cpu so is a
> lot
> > > quicker then tmpgenc.
> >
> > TMPGEnc uses hyperthreading and >1 logical processor too but
Mainconcept
> is
> > indeed a lot faster than TMPGEnc.
> >
> > > the disadvantage with main concept is that it APPEARS to drop a frame
> > every
> > > 3 or so seconds, giving a stop/start look. A lot of people i have
burnt
> > > stuff for using main concept have never noticed this, maybe it is just
> me?
> >
> > I suppose this is something in your setup. I never experienced this and
it
> > is the first time I heard of it.
> >
> > I use the Mainconcept encoder as a plugin (callex MPEG XS) in editing
> > program EditStudio 4 from www.puremotion.com. I have been using TMPGEnc
> for
> > a long time and I know how to tweak it but my results with Mainconcept
are
> > visibly better. Finer detail and less (no) artifacts.
> > --
> > Lou van Wijhe
> > jl.vanwijhe@hccnet.nl
> > AntiSpam: Om me te mailen, plaats een punt tussen "van" en "wijhe"
> > AntiSpam: For mailing me put a full stop between "van" and "wijhe"
> >
> >
> > > "WH" <user@server.com> wrote in message
> > > news:WSJdc.26194$YC5.18761@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> > > > For a while now I've been rendering from Vegas to AVI then using
> TMPGEnc
> > > to
> > > > make MPG2 for DVD. I had forgotten that I can go from Vegas
directly
> to
> > > DVD
> > > > MPG2 and save myself a step. I believe it uses the Main Concept
> > encoder.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone have an opinion of whether one is significantly better
> than
> > > the
> > > > other.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > WH
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 22:31:34 -0500, "WH" <user@server.com> wrote:

>For a while now I've been rendering from Vegas to AVI then using TMPGEnc to
>make MPG2 for DVD. I had forgotten that I can go from Vegas directly to DVD
>MPG2 and save myself a step. I believe it uses the Main Concept encoder.
>
>Does anyone have an opinion of whether one is significantly better than the
>other.

The MainConcept MPEG encoder that comes with Sony's Vegas is faster than
TMPGEnc, if that makes any difference. As far as quality, I think they are
pretty close, although many claim TMPGEnc is superior.

I try and use the standalone MainConcept MPEG encoder rather than the Vegas
one whenever possible. The standalone one is far, far faster and more
flexible (e.g., allows 2-pass VBR MPEG-2).
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

How about TMPGenc vs Sorenson Squeeze 3.5? I had good result with default
(2-pass VBS) SVCD compression on Sorenson. TMPGEnc appears to have more
options you can set but I had to tweak more to get smooth SVCD playback. I
have not tried to compare DVD option on Sorenson vs MPEG2 for DVD on
TMPEnc.

Any other comments?

Thanks,

cpliu