# Converting Mpeg 2 to Mpeg 4



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

Since the S3 will only record Mpeg 2 but play Mpeg 4, will if be possible to pull the mpeg 2 off the box and convert it to Mpeg 4 and then send it back? This way you could save on space.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

I doubt that the new MPEG4 DVR for DirecTV HD will make it easy to extract the files. And, the S3 you mention is a standalone DVR.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

It would not be practical. For it to be practical the original MPEG-2 would have to be done at a high profile and level (IOW, minimum compression). As we know, MPEG-2 from DTV is already highly compressed. IOW, you would sacrifice a lot of quality for a little more space.

An example would be to take an MP3 compressed at 128kbps and convert it to AAC at 128kbps. While either algorithm would sound good if the source was CD quality (uncompressed 705kbps), converting one to the other gives a severely degraded result.


----------



## aztivo (Feb 23, 2005)

I believe that the question was about the Series 3 Tivo... and I dont know if you can do this. You can always just get an external SATA drive for more space


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

I was referring to the Series 3, not DirectTV.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Difficult to say. We don't really know what kind of "reverse-Tivo-To-Go" feature will be available. Do we definitely know that MPEG4 is supported? Since the S3 will be recording off-air ATSC (which is MPEG2) or video from the cablecos, I'm not sure where MPEG4 would enter into the picture.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

cheer said:


> Difficult to say. We don't really know what kind of "reverse-Tivo-To-Go" feature will be available. Do we definitely know that MPEG4 is supported? Since the S3 will be recording off-air ATSC (which is MPEG2) or video from the cablecos, I'm not sure where MPEG4 would enter into the picture.


It's been stated(I forget where) that the S3 will play, but not record MPEG4.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

aztivo said:


> I believe that the question was about the Series 3 Tivo...


Which does nothing to change the argument that it is still impractical, or if attempted, the inevitable lame result. HD available to any consumer in any form is a highly-compressed file, on the order of between 50:1 to 83:1. You would need HD at its original raw acquisation level (1.458 Gb/s) or at least at some mezzanine level to prevent adding quite-visible artifacts to a M2 to M4 conversion.


----------



## josejrp (Sep 28, 2002)

Not to disagree, but isn't D* encoding MPEG2 to MPEG4 on the fly with good results? At least I haven't read many posts saying the MPEG4 locals are worse than the OTA MPEG2s... I would think if D* can do it on the fly with admittedly professional level equipment, we could do it with consumer encoders that take hours to encode a file. Of course, I am just guessing...


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

You make a very good point, but there are still two important sticking points in all of this. One is, as you say, that DTV is doing this with pro equipment, and that makes a big difference compared to what we could get our hands on or what could be economically put into a consumer-level box. The other is that even compressed to SMPTE310 (which is how OTA MPEG-2 reaches DTV) the quality is still higher than it is when we eventually get it delivered to us from DTV, who downrezzes it and further compresses it, which also could make a significant difference. Those two things together would likely make it impractical at a consumer level.

And, no matter how good the result DTV gets from their M2 to M4 conversion, the laws of physics come into play, making it technically impossible to chain algorithms without concatenation, which always results in increased artifacting. Maybe it's not that noticeable, but it is undeniably there.

Another point you touched on is that we could use a non-real-time rendering crossconversion algorithm. I agree that this would be a better approach and that would probably help the quality a lot, even in spite of the gross impracticality of it in a consumer box, limiting it pretty much to PC hobbyists. But the most important indicator of a good cross convert is still the PQ of the original. Without a good original, the end result is typically not good, regardless of the algorithm. So that would still very likely give you a visible loss of PQ, which is a high price for a little more storage space.

IOW, comparing a pro real-time process to a consumer-level intensive rendering process might narrow the difference between them, but the lower in quality the original gets (and unalduterated SMPTE310 is about the lowest you would want to go), the more any advantage would be wiped out, especially if the DTV original is better than the consumer original.

And a lot is based on the skill involved in applying these tools. I still can't get anyone to believe I can re-encode The Howard Stern Show from Sirius at 16kbps/AAC for iPod and get no audible loss of quality, but 600 hours later, it still sounds pretty darn good to me, and live Sirius sounds really no better. And that is an already-compressed signal, too.

But we're all just guessing here. It's just that some guesses are more based on the physics involved than some others might be.


----------



## aztivo (Feb 23, 2005)

okay but agian he isnt talking about using D* over compressed mpeg 2 he is talking more about grabing it OTA with the SERIES 3 TIVO and then recompressing to mpeg 4. No one is saying that wont lose quality he was just asking if it could be done?? NOT WITH D*


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

I see no reason he couldn't do it, and based on my own encodes, I don't think he'd lose much quality, either. But I don't think there'd be much point to it. In the time it took him to do all that, he could... you know... just watch the show.

Taking that time can make sense if you're sharing it online, where the download time savings is multiplied by the number of downloaders. But for just saving space on your own Tivo, I don't see it being worthwhile.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

wmcbrine said:


> I see no reason he couldn't do it, and based on my own encodes, I don't think he'd lose much quality, either. But I don't think there'd be much point to it. In the time it took him to do all that, he could... you know... just watch the show.
> 
> Taking that time can make sense if you're sharing it online, where the download time savings is multiplied by the number of downloaders. But for just saving space on your own Tivo, I don't see it being worthwhile.


You'd be surprised. I currently have a couple hundred gigs of saved tive files. I also have a dual core computer. So I could have it run the video conversion in the background with no effect on my computer usage. So in this case, file size is more important to me than time. You're also forgetting that I can let the computer convert while I'm asleep or at work. Those are both times where I couldn't be watching the show.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

aztivo said:


> okay but agian he isnt talking about using D* over compressed mpeg 2 he is talking more about grabing it OTA with the SERIES 3 TIVO and then recompressing to mpeg 4. No one is saying that wont lose quality he was just asking if it could be done?? NOT WITH D*


 No one is doubting it could be done, just whether it would be a good idea. IMHO, it is not. Not practical, not inexpensive enough to be done as anything other than hobbyist tinkering, and not ever something you will be able to lay down cash for at BB or CC.

OTA HD is already very-highly compressed, by a factor of 50:1 to 83:1. D* doesn't really compress it that much more, comparitively speaking, maybe another factor of 2:1, but what they do would only make the process even less practical. Converting their M4 to M2 which they already converted from M2 would probably be an unwatchable mess. And my answer is D*-centric because this is a D*-centric forum. To not slant it that way would make it off topic. And we would never want that.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

TyroneShoes said:


> No one is doubting it could be done, just whether it would be a good idea. IMHO, it is not. Not practical, not inexpensive enough to be done as anything other than hobbyist tinkering, and not ever something you will be able to lay down cash for at BB or CC.
> 
> OTA HD is already very-highly compressed, by a factor of 50:1 to 83:1. D* doesn't really compress it that much more, comparitively speaking, maybe another factor of 2:1, but what they do would only make the process even less practical. Converting their M4 to M2 which they already converted from M2 would probably be an unwatchable mess. And my answer is D*-centric because this is a D*-centric forum. To not slant it that way would make it off topic. And we would never want that.


Actually, this isn't a D*-centric forum. It's the HDTV DVR forum. Since the S3 handles HD, that makes my posts perfectly on topic. And since I stated in the OP that I was talking about the S3, that would make your D* posts off topic.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Hardly the case. And this is some of the more hyperbolic logic I've yet seen on the forums (which is really saying something). It might be off _your_ topic, but your self-important status as OP hardly makes you King of The Forums, or even in control of what happens in this thread. It's a spontaneous conversation, just like every other thread. If someone widens the discussion, suck it up and go with the flow, ferchrissake. The last thing we need is another pissing contest.

I didn't think I needed to remind anyone that this is the "HDTV Tivo powered PVRs" thread and a part of the Tivocommunity forum, but maybe it's not that obvious. Seeing as how the only "HDTV Tivo powered PVR" on earth, the last time I checked, is also only available to DirecTV subs, that makes this is a D*-centric forum by default, like it or not, and makes comments including D* options, completely appropriate, also like it or not.

Since the S3 is currently vaporware, discussion about it here rarely rises above the level of wild speculation and longing, and hardly ever provides useful information. For example, this thread if you take away any D*-centric discussion. So currently, posts about the S3 which is still a pipe dream are technically somewhat OT, also by default.

So, revered OP or not, maybe since you are posting a thread about something that only exists in the realm of the hypothetical, hopefully you can be open enough to allow other posters to broaden the scope of the thread to include things actually pertinent to reality, and pertinent to what this forum has always traditionally been about. Or maybe you can't. It's not like I actually hijacked the thread, even though this thread could really use a little hijacking to keep it from being completely boring.


----------



## TomB (Apr 28, 2000)

Hey, guys, lighten up....


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

TyroneShoes said:


> Hardly the case. And this is some of the more hyperbolic logic I've yet seen on the forums (which is really saying something). It might be off _your_ topic, but your self-important status as OP hardly makes you King of The Forums, or even in control of what happens in this thread. It's a spontaneous conversation, just like every other thread. If someone widens the discussion, suck it up and go with the flow, ferchrissake. The last thing we need is another pissing contest.
> 
> I didn't think I needed to remind anyone that this is the "HDTV Tivo powered PVRs" thread and a part of the Tivocommunity forum, but maybe it's not that obvious. Seeing as how the only "HDTV Tivo powered PVR" on earth, the last time I checked, is also only available to DirecTV subs, that makes this is a D*-centric forum by default, like it or not, and makes comments including D* options, completely appropriate, also like it or not.
> 
> ...


-sigh- 

I'll explain this again, so hopefully you'll get it.

I want to know about the S3 tivo. Not DTV, or any other HD tivo. I don't plan on getting DTV ever, so I could really care less about what it will or won't do. I do plan on eventually getting a S3. So I'm asking a question about what the capabilities of the S3 as published so far are. Again, I don't have or plan on getting a DTV tivo, so what it does or doesn't do is no concern of mine.

So, back to the original question.
I can pull mpeg2 video off the S3 and convert it to mpeg4 and send it back to the tivo. The only thing I'll lose is time and possibly any tivo information. What kind of size savings can I expect?


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Bai Shen said:


> -sigh-
> 
> I'll explain this again, so hopefully you'll get it...


So then maybe you should speak to us like we're 5-year-olds, or like we only graduated from a state college. And be sure not to use any words with more than two syllables.



Bai Shen said:


> ...I want to know about the S3 tivo. Not DTV, or any other HD tivo...So I'm asking a question about what the capabilities of the S3 as published so far are...So, back to the original question.
> I can pull mpeg2 video off the S3 and convert it to mpeg4 and send it back to the tivo...What kind of size savings can I expect?


Yet you started a thread in forum visited primarily by folks who +90% of them either have DTV and/or a HD DTivo or are considering it, with the broad title: "Converting MPEG 2 to MPEG 4". That sort of invites broad discussion on the topic, so I'm a little surprised that when that happens, this seems troublesome to you. 

I really don't mean to be harsh. While I discussed this a bit more broadly earlier, I'm really trying to give you an answer to your question, so, I'll explain this again, so hopefully _you'll _ get it, and I'll even leave out DTV and the HR10 to simplify the issue...

Yes, you could do it. No, it's probably not a good idea due to the PQ degradation you could expect vs. the capacity advantage. The amount of space you save will be indirectly proportional to the amount of compression used, determined by the settings you choose, the quality of the original video, and the sophistication of the algorithm itself. You could save 10% and possibly not notice much degradation, or 60% and notice a lot of degradation, or probably anything in between. There are too many variables in play to give you a hard answer on that. While this might be a fun way to kill an afternoon experimenting with this, as a practical application it is probably little more than a collosal waste of time.

I have converted MPEG-2 video to AVC MPEG-4 on my laptop, and while the results were surprisingly good, I started with good-quality SD from a DVD, which is not highly compressed, comparitively, to HD OTA (or from DTV). And of course the result was SD. It also took about 30 minutes to render 5 minutes of SD video. Multiply that by 5 or 6 for HD, and that means an ep of "Grey's Anatomy" will take you from early Tuesday to late Thursday, on a modern, well-powered PC.

Now, assuming you are happy with the quality and the hassle of all of that, "sending it back to the Tivo" would probably be yet another ordeal. I don't think the S3 will accept a direct file transfer,and the only inputs seem to be analog AM/FM-modulated NTSC SD, 8VSB-modulated ATSC, and QAM-modulated ATSC, which means no baseband video inputs, either. Unless you have a spare 8VSB modulator laying around I doubt you could do this at all, let alone while avoiding yet another chained compression algorithm, which would make the PQ just that much worse.

Most of those questions have already been answered in this thread, if you'd care to actually read the posts. Peace, and good luck.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

This is all just silly. Disk space is super cheap. I've got close to 5 terabytes in my house.

It makes absolutely no sense to recompress anything on the Tivo/PC when you can just pop in another hard drive for almost nothing.

Don't look for a complicated solution when a simple one is available.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

TyroneShoes said:


> Yet you started a thread in forum visited primarily by folks who +90% of them either have DTV and/or a HD DTivo or are considering it, with the broad title: "Converting MPEG 2 to MPEG 4". That sort of invites broad discussion on the topic, so I'm a little surprised that when that happens, this seems troublesome to you.


If you actually bothered to read the OP, you'd notice that I specifically stated the S3. The thread title has only so many characters. Perhaps you'd like me to put the whole post in the next time so you won't get confused?

And where else would you expect me to post about the S3? It is an HDTV Tivo Powered PVR.



TyroneShoes said:


> I really don't mean to be harsh. While I discussed this a bit more broadly earlier, I'm really trying to give you an answer to your question, so, I'll explain this again, so hopefully _you'll _ get it, and I'll even leave out DTV and the HR10 to simplify the issue...
> 
> Yes, you could do it. No, it's probably not a good idea due to the PQ degradation you could expect vs. the capacity advantage. The amount of space you save will be indirectly proportional to the amount of compression used, determined by the settings you choose, the quality of the original video, and the sophistication of the algorithm itself. You could save 10% and possibly not notice much degradation, or 60% and notice a lot of degradation, or probably anything in between. There are too many variables in play to give you a hard answer on that. While this might be a fun way to kill an afternoon experimenting with this, as a practical application it is probably little more than a collosal waste of time.
> 
> ...


You can use TTG to send the files back. No extra equipment required.

And I did read the posts. They were mostly about DTV which wasn't relevant.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

AbMagFab said:


> This is all just silly. Disk space is super cheap. I've got close to 5 terabytes in my house.
> 
> It makes absolutely no sense to recompress anything on the Tivo/PC when you can just pop in another hard drive for almost nothing.
> 
> Don't look for a complicated solution when a simple one is available.


Time is cheaper than disk space. Letting my computer process overnight or in the background costs me nothing but time. Disk space costs me money. I also need to have someplace to put the disks. I'm planning on getting a SAN, but that won't be until next year.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

Bai Shen said:


> Time is cheaper than disk space. Letting my computer process overnight or in the background costs me nothing but time. Disk space costs me money. I also need to have someplace to put the disks. I'm planning on getting a SAN, but that won't be until next year.


Time is much more expensive than disk space. At least for most of us.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> I didn't think I needed to remind anyone that this is the "HDTV Tivo powered PVRs" thread and a part of the Tivocommunity forum, but maybe it's not that obvious. Seeing as how the only "HDTV Tivo powered PVR" on earth, the last time I checked, is also only available to DirecTV subs, that makes this is a D*-centric forum by default, like it or not, and makes comments including D* options, completely appropriate, also like it or not.
> 
> Since the S3 is currently vaporware, discussion about it here rarely rises above the level of wild speculation and longing, and hardly ever provides useful information. For example, this thread if you take away any D*-centric discussion. So currently, posts about the S3 which is still a pipe dream are technically somewhat OT, also by default.


Regardless, this forum is going to be becomming less and less "D*-centric" as DirecTV is hell bent on obsoleting the HR10-250...


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

AbMagFab said:


> Time is much more expensive than disk space. At least for most of us.


So you work on your computer 24/7? Like I said, I have a dual core computer. It can convert in the background and not effect anything I'm doing.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Adam1115 said:


> Regardless, this forum is going to be becomming less and less "D*-centric" as DirecTV is hell bent on obsoleting the HR10-250...


They are not "hell bent" on obsoleting the HR10-250.
They are "hell bent" on getting rid of MPEG-2 HD; which is what the HR10-250 can only see... and just about every other HD reciever in DirecTV land, with the exception of the H20...

HR10-250 isn't the target, the MPEG2 HD format is... HR10-250 is just a casualty of that effort... (and I am one of those that drop $1,000 on the unit)


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

Bai Shen said:


> So you work on your computer 24/7? Like I said, I have a dual core computer. It can convert in the background and not effect anything I'm doing.


That's not the time I'm referring to, it's the time between when it's recorded and when I can watch it.

A DVR is almost useless to me if the program isn't available right away. I won't always watch it right away, but the time wasted converting it is exactly that - time wasted.

At less then 33 cents per gigabyte, disk space is far cheaper than time.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

AbMagFab said:


> At less then 33 cents per gigabyte, disk space is far cheaper than time.


Where are you shopping? I thought it would be more like 20 cents per gigabyte...
Gosh I remember getting my Best Buy credit card to by the $250 250 MB hard drive... $1 per MB was "all that" 13 years ago...


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> They are not "hell bent" on obsoleting the HR10-250.
> They are "hell bent" on getting rid of MPEG-2 HD; which is what the HR10-250 can only see... and just about every other HD reciever in DirecTV land, with the exception of the H20...
> 
> HR10-250 isn't the target, the MPEG2 HD format is... HR10-250 is just a casualty of that effort... (and I am one of those that drop $1,000 on the unit)


That's not totally true. They *are* hell bent on getting rid of Tivo. The R15 has nothing to do with MPEG-2/4, it has everything to do with taking their DVR work in house. (And failing at it, although that's not their goal.)

So as a result, they are hell-bent of getting rid of the HR10, because it's Tivo.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> Where are you shopping? I thought it would be more like 20 cents per gigabyte...
> Gosh I remember getting my Best Buy credit card to by the $250 250 MB hard drive... $1 per MB was "all that" 13 years ago...


I know - it wasn't even that long ago it was $1 per GB!

I'm talking SATA 3GB drives, which are generally at 30 cents per GB nowadays. I'm sure you can get them cheaper if you buy 10+ at once, but that's the general price.

If you know someplace cheaper, let me know. I'm constantly buying drives.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

AbMagFab said:


> That's not the time I'm referring to, it's the time between when it's recorded and when I can watch it.
> 
> A DVR is almost useless to me if the program isn't available right away. I won't always watch it right away, but the time wasted converting it is exactly that - time wasted.
> 
> At less then 33 cents per gigabyte, disk space is far cheaper than time.


Ah. I tend to store things up before watching them. I record a lot more than I have time to watch. Therefore, I need the storage space more than I need the time.

As for disks, you still have to put them somewhere. I don't have a SAN yet, and I don't really wanna buy disks smaller than 500GB.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

AbMagFab said:


> That's not totally true. They *are* hell bent on getting rid of Tivo. The R15 has nothing to do with MPEG-2/4, it has everything to do with taking their DVR work in house. (And failing at it, although that's not their goal.)
> 
> So as a result, they are hell-bent of getting rid of the HR10, because it's Tivo.


Well yes... they are definently pushing "their" product more then the DTiVo line of recievers... but they are not actively (nor probably ever will) do anything to stop the ones that are out there from working...

I don't know how much they are "failing" at it, and we can debate that another time. The R15 has been steadily improving since its release... Still not up to par with TiVo in certain areas, but it is improving.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> They are not "hell bent" on obsoleting the HR10-250.
> They are "hell bent" on getting rid of MPEG-2 HD; which is what the HR10-250 can only see... and just about every other HD reciever in DirecTV land, with the exception of the H20...
> 
> HR10-250 isn't the target, the MPEG2 HD format is... HR10-250 is just a casualty of that effort... (and I am one of those that drop $1,000 on the unit)


Then why was the R10 discontinued in favor of the non-TiVo r15? Then why isn't the HR20 MPEG4 (and not already out by the way..)??

Give me a break. They ARE hell bent on getting rid of TiVo, which is why the new models aren't TiVo based. They could've had the MPEG4 DVR out MUUCH faster if it were TiVo based...


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

That isn't "hell" bent on getting rid of the DTivo.
That is discontinuing a product, in favor of another (that happens to be your own).

That is not very uncommon in the buisness/manufacturing world.

I don't see many people picking up the TiVo software for their DVR... with the exception of Comcast which sure has taken their sweet time to get that unit out... wasn't it announced nearly 2 years ago?

So what does that say about TiVo, Inc? Maybe they are the ones playing hardball...... (I am not saying that is the case, but sure could be a possibility)

----------
"Why isn't the HR20 MPEG4 Out".... I don't know, still in development? Making sure manufacturing processes are correct? Building Inventory? finalizing software?

Regardless... based on an "OFFICIAL" email I got today from Directv... 
They are quoting a "Fall 2006" release time frame.
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=60287

--------------------
If they where "hell bent" on getting rid of the DTiVo product, they could flip a switch and turn them all off.

If they where "hell bent" on getting rid of the DTivo product, why did they extend the contract...

--------------------
I don't see the TiVo Series 3 out yet?

I don't see the Comcast TiVo box out yet?

So what makes you think the MPEG-4 DTivo could have been released any quicker, if it was based on TiVo software?

There is more to the puzzle then what OS and application runs on it.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Bai Shen said:


> If you actually bothered to read the OP, you'd notice that I specifically stated the S3. The thread title has only so many characters. Perhaps you'd like me to put the whole post in the next time so you won't get confused?
> 
> And where else would you expect me to post about the S3? It is an HDTV Tivo Powered PVR.


 No, it isn't, because "it" doesn't exist. At this point in time it is still an _imaginary_ PVR. Let's all take a deep breath and hold it until "it" ships.

Putting aside your passive-aggressive comments for the moment, perhaps you should narrow the subject in the title if you really want to control the thread better. "S3" is only two characters, and that leaves you plenty more for "...converting M2/M4...". Of course since the S3 isn't expected to even do M4, it's puzzling how that might even fit into the equation. While your specific idea is preposterous, the general concept of M2/M4 conversion is interesting, so slap the cuffs on me for ignoring the ridiculous and keying on the interesting.

Ignoring the fact that you are the one who brought up the subject of converting M4/M2 in the first place, I'm sorry if you get confused when folks reply to a legitimately posted subject in legitimate ways that you aren't expecting, but then that's how the forums have always worked. I guess you have a perfect right to whine about it to those who will listen, but most of us just get used to it and use that to our advantage, instead of complaining that other people's posts don't contain the precise answers we wanted to hear.

It feels like you are using a weakly lame argument that certain posts were not precisely specific to your particular situation to desperately smokescreen the fact that the whole concept of what you are proposing is a laughable, embarrasingly dumb idea. Fess up.


----------



## Bai Shen (Dec 17, 2004)

TyroneShoes said:


> No, it isn't, because "it" doesn't exist. At this point in time it is still an _imaginary_ PVR. Let's all take a deep breath and hold it until "it" ships.


I'm sure everyone that saw it in Vegas recently were hallucinating. You're right. It's doesn't exist because you say so.



> Putting aside your passive-aggressive comments for the moment, perhaps you should narrow the subject in the title if you really want to control the thread better. "S3" is only two characters, and that leaves you plenty more for "...converting M2/M4...". Of course since the S3 isn't expected to even do M4, it's puzzling how that might even fit into the equation. While your specific idea is preposterous, the general concept of M2/M4 conversion is interesting, so slap the cuffs on me for ignoring the ridiculous and keying on the interesting.


It's already been stated by Tivo that the S3 will play M4. It jus' won't record it. So I'd hardly call that ridiculous.



> Ignoring the fact that you are the one who brought up the subject of converting M4/M2 in the first place, I'm sorry if you get confused when folks reply to a legitimately posted subject in legitimate ways that you aren't expecting, but then that's how the forums have always worked. I guess you have a perfect right to whine about it to those who will listen, but most of us just get used to it and use that to our advantage, instead of complaining that other people's posts don't contain the precise answers we wanted to hear.
> 
> It feels like you are using a weakly lame argument that certain posts were not precisely specific to your particular situation to desperately smokescreen the fact that the whole concept of what you are proposing is a laughable, embarrasingly dumb idea. Fess up.


Ranting about all things DTV isn't a constructive post. You've tried to twist everything I've posted to be about your agenda with DTV. You're ignoring the facts as listed. So pull your head out of your ass and look around.

Anyways, I'm done dealing with you.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Bai Shen said:


> ...I'm done dealing with you.


That's just fine with me, because I'll be licking myself in places I can't mention here just to get the bad taste out of my mouth. And I'm not quite done dealing with you.



Bai Shen said:


> I'm sure everyone that saw it in Vegas recently were hallucinating. You're right. It's doesn't exist because you say so...


Everyone "were" hallucinating? 

No, it doesn't exist, simply because it doesn't exist. If you are so naive as to not understand that what was displayed in LV was only a laboratory curiosity, and far from a real product that is shipping and that people can actually buy and use, then I'm not sure how anyone here can help you. We all see many things in 'Vegas that don't exist anywhere else in our day to day reality, and those displayed at trade shows are some of the least likely to ever exist, as history will attest. I do expect some version of the S3 will exist, but as a practical option, it does not exist now. Does NOT exist. This makes planning how you might use it just a bit premature as well as OT for any relevant discussion on a forum about other things that do actually exist.



Bai Shen said:


> ...Ranting about all things DTC isn't a constructive post. You've tried to twist everything I've posted to be about your agenda with DTV. You're ignoring the facts as listed...


 There is apparently no getting through to you. First of all, I have no actual clue as to what "DTC" might even be. You calling my post not constructive, that I am twisting things, ignoring the facts, or that I have some agenda is really laughable, as it seems that those are all traits that are quite uniquely yours. If you could give any proof of any of that, I'd be happy to bow down and kiss your ring. And a "just read for yourself" reply would be the exact opposite of proof, so don't bother.



Bai Shen said:


> ...It's already been stated by Tivo that the S3 will play M4. It jus' won't record it. So I'd hardly call that ridiculous...


OK, then I think I can end this. Many of us are also somewhat naive as to how this would all work, and I freely admit to being among them. If you are so hell-bent on this idea, just please simply explain for us a few things:

1. How would you move the originally recorded file onto a platform such as a PC where you could do this conversion? Would it not have to be streamed out as baseband in real time, adding at least one D/A conversion and significant time to the process?

2. We understand how to convert on a PC, but how much time will you expect to have to devote to rendering each 1-hour program? I guess if you cave in and simply add another conversion, as above, you could skip the rendering, but professionally or even not professionally converting M2 directly to M4 gives quite a different level of resultant quality than converting M2 to real-time analog baseband and then simply recording it to M4. Doing it that way gives a much degraded level of quality.

3. How will you get the M4 version you have rendered (or recorded) back into the Tivo (which does not exist)? Since it appears that the proposed inputs are ATSC, NTSC, and QAM, is there a way to get this file into the Tivo without remodulating it? If so, or if not, how is a consumer expected to accomplish that?

4. How would you propose to save the metadata? IOW, how would the Tivo then know how to display the recording as originally titled? One of the significant advantages of a PVR over a VCR is the cataloged and displayed database. I think you would end up with a long list of undistinguishable "Manual Recording"s in the NPL. Personally, I would never trade that for a meager space savings.

5. Since by your own admission the S3 will not record as M4, would not anything you put back into it be: (wait for it.....)

MPEG-2?

And doesn't that somewhat defeat the entire purpose of converting to M4?

If you can give a satisfactory answer to any of those questions (or even if you can't), then we'll have an idea of your true credibility. Edumacate us.

And then we'll be done dealing with you.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Not trying to get in the middle of an argument, here...and I don't have any more information about the S3 than anyone else here. So this is just speculation.


TyroneShoes said:


> 1. How would you move the originally recorded file onto a platform such as a PC where you could do this conversion? Would it not have to be streamed out as baseband in real time, adding a D/A conversion and significant time to the process?


<edit>


> 3. How will you get the M4 version you have rendered (or recorded) back into the Tivo (which does not exist)? Since it appears that the inputs are ATSC, NTSC, and QAM, is there a way to get this file into the Tivo without remodulating it? How does a consumer accomplish that?
> 
> 4. How do you save the metadata? IOW, how does the Tivo then know how to display the recording as originally titled? One of the great advantages of a PVR is the cataloged and displayed database. I think you would end up with a long list of undistinguishable "Manual Recording"s. Personally, I would never trade that for a meager space savings.
> 
> ...


If the S3 really will support MPEG4, then the answer to all of these would be "TivoToGo." TivoToGo currently allows (A) downloading of streams from the Tivo to the PC (no D/A conversion), (B) putting streams (that are in the proper format) back onto the Tivo, and (C) preservation of metadata. It's not a stretch to think that if the S3 supports MPEG4 that TTG could send MPEG4 streams straight to the Tivo as-is without re-encoding.

As I said, just speculation.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

There is no argument, just an attempt to directly get to the truth. And now we're actually getting somewhere. Finally, someone with real knowledge who can explain things succinctly. Those are great answers, and now I understand much more than I did before. Thank you. Maybe this thread isn't so boring after all.

That means that you could upload from the Tivo to a PC, convert, and download it back. Very cool, and this actually brings Bai's concept into reality. Of course without TTG, it's still a pipe dream. That should only take how long? And would provide how much space savings? and would degrade the original HD quality by how much?


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Well TTG as it exists on the S2 is very slow for transferring. I don't know why. Who knows whether this will be improved on the S3. 

Encoding, of course, depends on the PC, but on my AMD Athlon 64 3000+ it takes me about an hour and 15 minutes to convert a 45-minute video to MPEG4 using single-pass Divx 6.2 pro.

So being able to download the show, possibly edit it (given that the .tivo files today have DRM protection and bypassing that has DMCA issues) and re-upload it is almost certainly not worth the effort, even given the space savings (a 1GB MPEG2 file for me drops to about 320MB in MPEG4). There is always going to be quality degredation when one re-encodes a video to a lossy format (as all MPEG flavors are), but done properly it can be minimal.

Of much more value (I would think) would be the ability to send MPEG4 videos from other sources to the Tivo. Legally-converted movies, home vids, video podcasts...MPEG4 is already very common for these sorts of things and it'd be cool if one could use the Tivo as a player for this stuff. Combined with HMO this could make the Tivo a network-aware media player.

S'pose we'll have to wait and see what the official features list shows.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> That's just fine with me, because I'll be licking myself in places I can't mention here just to get the bad taste out of my mouth. And I'm not quite done dealing with you.
> 
> Everyone "were" hallucinating?
> 
> No, it doesn't exist, simply because it doesn't exist. If you are so naive as to not understand that what was displayed in LV was only a laboratory curiosity, and far from a real product that is shipping and that people can actually buy and use, then I'm not sure how anyone here can help you. We all see many things in 'Vegas that don't exist anywhere else in our day to day reality, and those displayed at trade shows are some of the least likely to ever exist, as history will attest. I do expect some version of the S3 will exist, but as a practical option, it does not exist now. Does NOT exist. This makes planning how you might use it just a bit premature as well as OT for any relevant discussion on a forum about other things that do actually exist.


Your exact words were that the "S3 is vaporware" which is simply not true. 2005 CES showed a 'mockup' of a series 3. 2006 CES showed a WORKING PROTOTYPE (meaning it is obviously not VAPORWARE and it DOES exist even though there is only 1.)

Yes, many things at CES do not make it to production, yet in this case, TiVo has said over and over that this product WILL be released second half of 2006.

So why are you arguing about the fact that this IS an up and coming product? Your premise that nobody should talk about products that aren't in production is obsurd...

IN FACT, in this thread: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=301821

You speculate that there are tens of thousands of Series 3 TiVo's in a warehouse. How is THAT vaporware???


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Adam1115 said:


> Your exact words were that the "S3 is vaporware" which is simply not true. 2005 CES showed a 'mockup' of a series 3. 2006 CES showed a WORKING PROTOTYPE (meaning it is obviously not VAPORWARE and it DOES exist even though there is only 1.)





Wikipedia said:


> Vaporware (in British English: Vapourware) is software or hardware which is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either with or without a protracted development cycle. The term implies unwarranted optimism, or sometimes even deception; that is, it implies that the announcer knows that product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility.


Sounds like one could argue that the S3 meets that definition. It's immaterial whether a prototype has been shown.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

cheer said:


> Sounds like one could argue that the S3 meets that definition. It's immaterial whether a prototype has been shown.


The key is "BUT FAILS TO EMERGE". If we are having this conversation 1/07, I will agree with you.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Adam1115 said:


> The key is "BUT FAILS TO EMERGE". If we are having this conversation 1/07, I will agree with you.


Well to be perfectly pedantic, until it emerges, it has failed to.  But I see what you're saying.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

While this should be possible, it would be a whole lot easier just to buy a eSATA drive and increase your storage. For about $250 you'll be able to add 500GB of storage, which will make the TiVo capable of holding about 100 hours of HD or up to 800 hours of SD.

Dan


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Again, I don't think (just my opinion, remember) that the MPEG4 stuff is about storage space. I think it's about being able to play vids that are already MPEG4.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Adam1115 said:


> Your exact words were that the "S3 is vaporware" which is simply not true...
> 
> So why are you arguing about the fact that this IS an up and coming product? Your premise that nobody should talk about products that aren't in production is obsurd...
> 
> ...You speculate that there are tens of thousands of Series 3 TiVo's in a warehouse. How is THAT vaporware???


Well, Adam, I truly thought the pissing contest might be over.

I guess it depends upon your definition of "vaporware". In my world, any microprocessor-based product that has been announced yet has not shipped, falls under that definition. Especially if a time frame is given for release, and then not met. That makes a zillion warehoused S3s today ultimately nothing but vaporware, by definition. But that doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing or a good thing. I'll leave it to all of the many arbiters of "all that is relevant" resident on this forum to pass judgment.

You are right, my premise is "obsurd" (spell-check is your friend, BTW). I agree completely. But, ask a silly question (OP), get a silly answer. The only reason I got on that bandwagon at all is because certain bat-sh*t crazies were going medieval on my ass under a razor-thin premise that I was OT. This was only a small part of my response to an even more "obsurd" attack. IOW, I was trying to make a point how ridiculously unimportant all of these stupid arguments really are, partially by presenting my own ridiculous argument as a counter-example. Some actually took the bait. Sorry if my prose wasn't elegant enough to keep that little fact from swooshing over your head. IOW, I allowed myself to sink to "their" level. Maybe that wasn't all that wise (hence, the licking myself in unmentionable places to get the bad taste out of my mouth, which was referred to earlier).

To set the record straight, I believe the S3 is imminent, and I expect it will be a terrific product, just like everything else out of Nevada City. I might even get one at some point. But it is still technically vaporware until I can walk in to CC and lay my hands on one. So, I stand by my statements.

Now, back to the thread. Wouldn't want to go OT, you know.


----------

