Comments on: Vimeo Respects the Specs: Better Audio Quality Encoding, Frame Rate Guidelines Update

By: Daniel Mimura

Daniel Mimura — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 03:19:54 +0000

I, like prolly most film geeks on this site, would rather wait and let it DL or buffer that was it all blurry and crappy. I hate the quality of a lot of streaming, and much prefer the download model of iTunes. It costs so much more, and I stream lots of Netflix stuff still, but I generally hate it.

By: Terence Kearns

Terence Kearns — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 06:46:53 +0000

Nice article, well written. Speaks for me. So thanks.

By: Dave Kendricken

Dave Kendricken — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 05:34:42 +0000

I'm sure 4K anywhere on the web is too, but internet delivery is slowly integrating into other traditional outlets (like the living room) -- there's no reason media centers can't increase quality in anticipation of being played through a higher-end home system, be it sound or video, particularly if the consumer prides his or herself on the specs... A.K.A, bragging points about the "man cave," at the very least -- why not?

By: VanWeddings

VanWeddings — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 03:46:40 +0000

that’s the solution vimeo offered to a bunch of users having the same problem (firefox and chrome never had the problem).. the thing is, i am technically self sufficient. i have three browsers installed and know how to update flash. but i can’t assume the same for all visitors. it’s them i have to worry about, and if vimeo didn’t work for a standard IE user out of the box i couldn’t use it.

interestingly i haven’t run into this problem in a few months and i have not changed my IE or flash installation. so maybe it was something on their end. i didn’t have time to wait so i switched.

By: Razor

Razor — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:13:53 +0000

To be more specific: 44.1 kHz can capture tones up to 22.05 kHz, while a 48 kHz can capture tones up to 24 kHz. The limit of human hearing is approximately 16-20 kHz based on average to exceptional ears.

By: kidtah

kidtah — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:52:11 +0000

Agree 100%. Delivery on the internet above 44.1kHz is completely useless.

By: Razor

Razor — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:48:52 +0000

Digital video uses 48 kHz. There will be aliasing artifacts near the limit of a filter, with simple filters having worse aliasing. Besides sync, the point of 48 kHz used in digital video is to get enough headroom for less computationally complex filters to operate without introducing audible artifacts.

By: Razor

Razor — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 11:07:18 +0000

I run multiple versions of Flash players and multiple IE versions for development testing: IE 7, IE 8, IE 9, and IE 10. Vimeo works great on any of these IE versions, because it’s really the Flash player doing the work anyway. For better performance update your Flash player to the latest version http://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 03:49:33 +0000

TYPO “….then mixed down to 41kHz/16-bit is completely acceptable.” meant 44.1kHz there =)

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 03:47:59 +0000

Cool of Vimeo to update/post their best compression specs

As Ian points out though, delivery format sampling rate in general is usually 44.1kHz

Frankly, unless there is the intent to do a lot of post audio processing, capturing at 48kHz/24-bit then mixed down to 41kHz/16-bit is completely acceptable.

Also, I find it interesting that no where in this article, or on the vimeo source page, is the bit rate clarified… I’m not 100% sure off the top of my head, but i suspect an AAC encode can be done in 24-bit. My google skills are fail atm, perhaps someone else can clarify =)

If Vimeo is doing 48kHz/16bit, I have a hard time appreciating the point. If doing 48kHz/24-bit, that is pretty cool, but only for serious audiophiles/studio pros with 40+ speaker count systems (talking tweeter/mids/woofs/subs – not enclosures) in a controlled listening environment.

By: Ian

Ian — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:17:45 +0000

CD’s may be a dying breed but all music is still mastered to 44.1kHz. Since I have a background in music when I record sound I never use anything other than 44.1kHz and If I would (for time streching for example) I would use 92kHz anyway. Of course it may be different if your final output is DVD or whatever.

By: Vimeo Respects the Specs: Better Audio Quality Encoding, Frame Rate Guidelines Update - NoFilmSchool | screenturner | Scoop.it

Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:10:12 +0000

[...] There's no doubt that things can get a bit confusing regarding non-integer frame rates — a decimal-specific frames-per-second count isn't exactly an intuitive [...]

By: Gabe

Gabe — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:14:09 +0000

Like aliasing…I’m not a sound guy, but I am a video guy and I know what can happen when downsampling images. I mean christ, anybody who knows anything about why DSLR video has issues should know that downsampling is important.

And there’s a difference between downsampling in a $3000 program and letting Vimeo do it.

By: VanWeddings

VanWeddings — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:49:02 +0000

when i last looked at vimeo as a video hosting solution, i ran into problems with vimeo videos sometimes not loading properly in IE, and had to cancel the plus account. youtube on the other hand, had zero problems loading. vimeo support blamed it on a particular version of flash, but i haven’t run into the problem recently and i haven’t updated flash.

both services have their quirks. i’ve just learned to live with youtube for now.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:30:17 +0000

16 bit, 44.1 has served us well, I feel, over the last thirty years. Any problems with material delivered in this format are likely due not to the limitations of the format, but to poor recording, mixing and mastering. Still nice of Vimeo, one way or the other. Cheers.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:24:18 +0000

What kind of problems? I’ve been an audio engineer since the late nineties and editing almost as long. I’ve yet to encounter problems from downsampling from 48 to 44.1.

By: Gabe

Gabe — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 22:15:23 +0000

Yeah, but the problem is no one records audio at 44.1…they record at 48 or 96. Downsampling from 96 to 48 is great, it’s like going from 4k resolution to 2k resolution. But downsampling from 48 to 44.1 is like going from 1920×1080 to 1764×992…it’s just fucking stupid, and will have problems because it’s not a clean half sample.

By: Swested

Swested — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:45:59 +0000

Not to mention, virtually all viewers are listening either through tinny speakers or inexpensive headphones plugged into a basic audio out port – making the difference even more negligible. Although it’s a nice gesture on Vimeo’s part anyway.

By: Razor

Razor — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 18:58:22 +0000

The difference is usually inaudible based on the limits of human hearing, and especially through cheap hardware… although 48 kHz can have a slightly higher frequency response, and with 44.1 kHz you can have more opportunities for distortion. Yes, commercial CDs are traditionally 16-bit/44.1 kHz, but then again CDs are a dying breed.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:06:30 +0000

While its great that Vimeo now allows 48 kilohertz audio for upload without converting to 44.1 (with its attendant synch issues), I defy anyone to distinguish between audio delivered at 44.1 and audio delivered at 48. Recording sample rate? I’d imagine that there could be a difference, but the quality of the analog-digital converters is much more important than the sample rate itself. At any rate (ha), make sure you are converting your audio to match the delivery specs yourself and you’ll be fine.