AVS Forum banner

2561 - 2580 of 2860 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
786 Posts
Well, that's a really strange thing considering the choice for 4K Ultra HD disks. So it seems there is no way to transmit the video unmodified from the disk to the display(or processor) via HDMI... :confused:
It never was, previously ycbcr 4:2:2 was allowed at least.
I bet they only "allow" / suggest 4:2:0 with 4k 60Hz because of compatibility reasons with certain devices (due to high bandwidth).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
You know, auto-tuned madVr HTPC, special release software would be the bees knees. Just copy Envy software with PC mods. I would pay big bucks for that software. Just require minimum hardware, such as RTX nVidia. Microsoft does this all the time and doesn’t have an issue. When your software is king, you get away with it!

Madshi, you could be a millionaire in one year and sipping drinks on the Riviera. :)
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | B&W 802D3, HTM1D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,376 Posts
You know, auto-tuned madVr HTPC, special release software would be the bees knees. Just copy Envy software with PC mods. I would pay big bucks for that software. Just require minimum hardware, such as RTX nVidia. Microsoft does this all the time and doesn’t have an issue. When your software is king, you get away with it!

Madshi, you could be a millionaire in one year and sipping drinks on the Riviera. :)
As a madVR owner, I would *not* pay money to have any sort of auto tuning added. I might pay money for additional algorithms. But presumably someone that has an HTPC running knows how to configure madVR so they don't need dumbed down grandma mode added.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
As a madVR owner, I would *not* pay money to have any sort of auto tuning added. I might pay money for additional algorithms. But presumably someone that has an HTPC running knows how to configure madVR so they don't need dumbed down grandma mode added.
Well, i guess that suggestion wasn´t aimed towards existing hardcore madVR users. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
As a madVR owner, I would *not* pay money to have any sort of auto tuning added. I might pay money for additional algorithms.
I'm also not interested in an Auto Tuning version, but i'm very interested in having a madVR version with (at least some of) the latest algorithms, and that will have to be paid.

I assume that from a business perspective, there will have to be a differentiation between Envy and even a potential paid madVR version, but maybe the madVR team can a find a business model where all parties are happy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
967 Posts
I'm also not interested in an Auto Tuning version, but i'm very interested in having a madVR version with (at least some of) the latest algorithms, and that will have to be paid.

I assume that from a business perspective, there will have to be a differentiation between Envy and even a potential paid madVR version, but maybe the madVR team can a find a business model where all parties are happy.
Sorry but I find it ridiculous to think that they should continue in any way improving the free version. It works fine now an frankly people have been benefiting from his Free hard work for years and it is time for him to make some money from the years of development he was never paid for and is a great product.

I do agree, that there could be paid upgrades to the free version and the Envy. Hardware sucks and is hard to support. If I was king of MadVR I would be sticking with software only and licensing the software to hardware vendors. But I am not King :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,349 Posts
Here's what I'd happily pay for. madVR RTX (tm). :D Bring me some tensor core algorithm love on the HTPC. Shut up and take my money! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: neo_2009

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
Sorry but I find it ridiculous to think that they should continue in any way improving the free version. It works fine now an frankly people have been benefiting from his Free hard work for years and it is time for him to make some money from the years of development he was never paid for and is a great product.
AFAIR madhsi already confirmed multiple times that he has no plans to drop the free madVR.
That wouldn´t be a smart move anyway since he can do a lot of test & learn with the madVR community.
Customers of a >10KEU device in general are not that adventurous that they would be happy with beta-testing new features and settings.
But the madVR community is.
So yes, i would expect the free madVR to be further developed in future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
967 Posts
AFAIR madhsi already confirmed multiple times that he has no plans to drop the free madVR.
That wouldn´t be a smart move anyway since he can do a lot of test & learn with the madVR community.
Customers of a >10KEU device in general are not that adventurous that they would be happy with beta-testing new features and settings.
But the madVR community is.
So yes, i would expect the free madVR to be further developed in future.
Didn't say he would drop it just I would not be spending time on it if I had a commercial product I can make money on. We will see, with hardware etc I think they will be tied up on the Envy for while.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,949 Posts
Hello all, I would like to jump in and contribute to this thread and expand upon the reasons why the picture quality using the free PC version of Madvr delivers a significantly better picture quality.

For starters, the PC version of Madvr contains the famous Madvr video renderer. This renderer is only available in the PC version and not in any other product including the Envy. While some may argue that a few external media players have a decent renderer none compete with the renderer that is part of the Madvr PC version. This alone gives the HTPC version of Madvr the edge.

Now consider a HTPC delivers the purest and shortest video path. There is less chance for something to alter the original source.
Setting up your external source devices with ‘optimal settings’ still does not solve the visual difference.

This alone can be very clearly seen when performing a side by side direct A-B comparison between a HTPC and a stand-alone video source. Throw in the PC version of Madvr with its superior renderer and the HTPC looks significantly superior. This is not slight. As if an additional layer of ‘grunge’ has been lifted. The image looks less noisy, cleaner, more realistic, natural, less edgy. Overall it is significantly more aesthetically pleasing to the eye.

Anyone having the privilege to screen a cinema DCP in private will agree the image is very natural, not edgy, smooth, pure, and clean. The DCP image cannot be compromised, it has to look good on very large screen sizes. Using a Madvr driven HTPC brings our consumer source a step closer to the quality of a cinema DCP. This is easily seen with the naked eye, no instrumentation needed.

But using a Madvr HTPC is not for the faint at heart, for many they are not user friendly, and the limitations and complexity of using a Madvr HTPC are off-putting for some people. However, for those seeking the "Absolute Ultimate" in video performance, the Madvr HTPC still represents the "Reference" standard for best video image quality and performance. It is the best image I have seen.
 

·
ABSOLUTE ULTIMATE AV
Joined
·
4,984 Posts

·
ABSOLUTE ULTIMATE AV
Joined
·
4,984 Posts
AFAIR madhsi already confirmed multiple times that he has no plans to drop the free madVR.
That wouldn´t be a smart move anyway since he can do a lot of test & learn with the madVR community.
Customers of a >10KEU device in general are not that adventurous that they would be happy with beta-testing new features and settings.
But the madVR community is.
So yes, i would expect the free madVR to be further developed in future.
Didn't say he would drop it just I would not be spending time on it if I had a commercial product I can make money on. We will see, with hardware etc I think they will be tied up on the Envy for while.
There are certain new algorithms that will need to make use of the madVR HTPC free software community in order to be developed and fine-tuned. So @madshi will indeed be spending more time on it.

Those that don't need to make use of the madVR HTPC free software community in order to be developed and fine-tuned can be made Envy exclusive.

Hence, he will almost certainly be spending time on BOTH :)

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,947 Posts
I think it is important that you get yourself set up with a Kaleidescape Strato system. It is considered the image reference in HT. Using a Lumagen on a DCI 4k 3p laser I find it necessary with the Lumagen to have a couple of presets with more or less highlight recovering to compensate for the quality of the Kaleidescape encodes. Not having presets in the Envy concerns me for this reason. It would be neat to have a database of catalogued Kaleidescape titles and have these presets automatically applied.
Well, of course no amount of good processing can fix an inferior encoding. I don't know how good or bad the Kaleidescape encodes are. If they are worse than UHD Blu-Ray, then Envy can't magically fix that. Neither could madVR, if it were able to play Kaleidescape encodes.

Not sure what you mean with "highlight recovering"?

Envy will support profiles (= presets). It's not implemented yet, but it will come "soon".

One thing evident to 3 Barco RGB laser systems with lumagens, when compared to madvr that perhaps is going unnoticed in lcos sxrd, is a slight DNR look, it is attributed to the very high DCI bandwidth. So is it possible that the envy might also be lossier than a madvr HTPC because of th additional circuitry? Like the case of the lumagen with the DCI RGB Barco's is at the moment. Lumagen is working on pipeline enhancements which should help the mild dnr look (again noted just on DCI RGB laser Barcos).
I'm not sure what exactly causes that DNR look you're seeing. I would assume that a good source device (e.g. an Oppo in Source Direct mode) would not result in images that have a DNR look. Using any CE source device currently comes with a small loss in chroma channel quality, but I think in most frames/scenes that should not make a big difference. And as I mentioned in my previous post, I have some ideas on how to fix this chroma quality loss, by doing some clever processing within the Envy. But the algo for that is not ready yet.

Generally, if you want to compare the quality of 2 source devices, of course you should use the same encoding. So for example, when comparing a madVR HTPC with a "CE source device -> Lumagen" combo, you should pick an UHD Blu-Ray, for example, and play the very same UHD Blu-Ray through both setups. Letting madVR play an UHD Blu-Ray, and comparing that to "Kaleidoscape -> Lumagen" would not be a fair test, if Kaleidscape uses a different encoding. It could be unfair to either madVR or to Lumagen, depending on whether the Kaleidoscape encoding is better or worse than the UHD Blu-Ray.

as you may know much better then me you can just put multiply GPUs in a row for rendering.
Sorry, my comment was unclear. I didn't mean SLI as in using 2 GPUs. What I meant is that we don't want to use an SLI *mainboard*, because the PCIe lane configuration doesn't meet our requirements. The mainboard we're using in the Envy actually works better for us than a typical SLI mainboard would.

A suggestion: you might give out a list of validated CE source devices (incl AVR and players) that you know that are working well with the Envy (under the condition of course the settings of those devices are correct).
We might do that. But it will take time because in order to validate a CE source device we first need to create proper tests so we can properly evaluate CE source device quality.

@HDfury posted in another thread...

... there is no VIC (Video Identification Code) for any 4K24/25/30 4:2:0 which means that no device in the world will support it natively. Yet some displays do support it (one LG in our lab), now finding a source that can output it is another story.

So I think a player would have to store a zero in the VIC code and it would be up to the Envy to be able to determine by other means that it is getting 4:2:0.
From what I can see in CTA 861-G, the VIC codes are independent of the pixel encoding. Which means there's one VIC code which applies to all bitdepths and pixel format (4:2:0, 4:2:2, 4:4:4 and RGB). Which pixel format is used is not defined by the VIC code, but by the AVI InfoFrame.

So it seems there is no way to transmit the video unmodified from the disk to the display(or processor) via HDMI...
As far as I understand: Yes, there is.

Hey guys I observe a lip sync issue. Is there any lag ? Many thanks
I m blocked to 100 ms on the Sennheiser ambeo and it s not enough ! Any idea ?
Are you a madVR user? If so, please use one of the madVR support threads. If you're an Envy beta tester, please contact me directly via email, or write to [email protected]. Thanks!

Anyone having the privilege to screen a cinema DCP in private will agree the image is very natural, not edgy, smooth, pure, and clean. The DCP image cannot be compromised, it has to look good on very large screen sizes. Using a Madvr driven HTPC brings our consumer source a step closer to the quality of a cinema DCP. This is easily seen with the naked eye, no instrumentation needed.

But using a Madvr HTPC is not for the faint at heart, for many they are not user friendly, and the limitations and complexity of using a Madvr HTPC are off-putting for some people. However, for those seeking the "Absolute Ultimate" in video performance, the Madvr HTPC still represents the "Reference" standard for best video image quality and performance. It is the best image I have seen.
Thank you for your praise of madVR's quality! :)
 
2561 - 2580 of 2860 Posts
Top