Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Stuttering Media/Old LG TV
68 views
Skip to first unread message
The Natural Philosopher
Jul 19, 2022, 11:47:27 AM7/19/22
to
On 19/07/2022 15:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features". Being
> able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the most
> useful.
>
> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been made
> problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>
> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>
> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering, the
> TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>
> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
> Now surely even the most basic and cheap USB stick (this is a Sandisk)
> could support the speeds needed for HD playback at that density ? c.
> 100kb/s ?
>
> I find myself wondering if the heat could have messed things up ?
>
> We don't watch anything beyond HD as SWMBO doesn't benefit from the
> resolution.
Fra\nkly I am giving up on TVS as anythiug but HDMI equipped monitors
with PCs in the front of them., They seem to be able to do that,
anything internet is simply beyond them
--
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”
― Groucho Marx
> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features". Being
> able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the most
> useful.
>
> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been made
> problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>
> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>
> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering, the
> TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>
> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
> Now surely even the most basic and cheap USB stick (this is a Sandisk)
> could support the speeds needed for HD playback at that density ? c.
> 100kb/s ?
>
> I find myself wondering if the heat could have messed things up ?
>
> We don't watch anything beyond HD as SWMBO doesn't benefit from the
> resolution.
Fra\nkly I am giving up on TVS as anythiug but HDMI equipped monitors
with PCs in the front of them., They seem to be able to do that,
anything internet is simply beyond them
--
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”
― Groucho Marx
Paul
Jul 19, 2022, 4:22:12 PM7/19/22
to
On 7/19/2022 12:29 PM, Jethro_uk wrote:
>
First of all, that's perfectly normal. DVD rates might be
down around the 2MB/sec level or so.
For a fast USB stick, try "Sandisk Extreme Pro", not "Sandisk Ultra"
which is not Ultra by any stretch. If you had a Walmart, it would
only have Sandisk Ultra, which you do not want. The Walmart stocks
"everything you do not want to own" :-) That's how that works.
A proper computer store will have the Extreme Pro.
Stock?
https://www.westerndigital.com/products/usb-flash-drives/sandisk-extreme-pro-usb-3-2#SDCZ880-128G-G46
Slower, but stock available. Availability is not that easy to predict. Still good. Name change
from Extreme Go to Extreme Pro or something, while keeping same SKU.
https://www.westerndigital.com/products/usb-flash-drives/sandisk-extreme-go-usb-3-1#SDCZ800-128G-G46
The Pro connector is USB3, but both USB3 and USB2 rates are supported.
It would plug into a TV set. At USB3, it reads at 200MB/sec. At USB2,
it reads at peak USB2 bus rate, which is 30-35MB/sec. The material
being played back on TV, is only requested at 2MB/sec. There are
some AVC formats that play at higher speed, but would be 4K material
as well. If the TV set has a USB3 connector, you know it supports
the whizzy stuff.
Yes, it's quite possible for USB2 sticks, to drop to 1MB/sec on
read, and this happens a day or two before they fail completely :-)
(I had a couple regular USB3 sticks do that.)
Kingston makes a USB3.2 Rev2 stick (not a 2x2), that runs at
700MB/sec when benchmarked. It is wider than a regular stick and
bumps into stuff. Being USB-C on the connector, lots of old kit
will not be plug and play. That's why I am pushing the
Sandisk Extreme Pro, as it has a Type A connector, suited
to more old equipment. TV sets never seem to have good USB.
The Sandisk Extreme Pro (several versions), should manage
to write at 100MB/sec and read at 200MB/sec. Some go faster
than that, but may currently be out of stock.
SDCZ80-032G USB3 port 180MB/sec read (measured)
USB2 port 37MB/sec read (measured - likely UASP, TV is not UASP)
SDCZ800-064G USB3 port 155MB/sec read (measured) Writes ~100 or so.
SDCZ880-128G-G46 USB3 400MB/sec estimated (no stock, design is a couple years old)
(not even an advert at my shop)
That Kingston I mentioned, appears to be a paper-launch here,
as both the big and small one are "out of stock". Having the
advert for them is just a waste of time, unless they have stock.
No, I won't be buying one -- only one of my PCs here has the USB-C
connector so far. My USB3.2 add-on card didn't even have
a USB-C connector.
The problem with stuff like Sandisk Ultra, is write speed.
Takes a while to fill. Still fast enough for TV set reads,
but is an annoying product otherwise. Even the LED pattern
on those is annoying.
I have several Lexar ones here that would rate a "don't bother".
Since USB sticks are built to a price point, it's simply not
possible for the "USB fleet" to impress. They have to suck.
It's a requirement.
Paul
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:47:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 19/07/2022 15:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
>>> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the
>>> most useful.
>>>
>>> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
>>> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>>>
>>> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
>>> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>>>
>>> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
>>> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>>>
>>> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>>
>> That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
> The irony being we'd probably not notice if it was 1.8Gb ...
>
>> On 19/07/2022 15:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
>>> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the
>>> most useful.
>>>
>>> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
>>> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>>>
>>> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
>>> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>>>
>>> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
>>> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>>>
>>> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>>
>> That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
>
First of all, that's perfectly normal. DVD rates might be
down around the 2MB/sec level or so.
For a fast USB stick, try "Sandisk Extreme Pro", not "Sandisk Ultra"
which is not Ultra by any stretch. If you had a Walmart, it would
only have Sandisk Ultra, which you do not want. The Walmart stocks
"everything you do not want to own" :-) That's how that works.
A proper computer store will have the Extreme Pro.
Stock?
https://www.westerndigital.com/products/usb-flash-drives/sandisk-extreme-pro-usb-3-2#SDCZ880-128G-G46
Slower, but stock available. Availability is not that easy to predict. Still good. Name change
from Extreme Go to Extreme Pro or something, while keeping same SKU.
https://www.westerndigital.com/products/usb-flash-drives/sandisk-extreme-go-usb-3-1#SDCZ800-128G-G46
The Pro connector is USB3, but both USB3 and USB2 rates are supported.
It would plug into a TV set. At USB3, it reads at 200MB/sec. At USB2,
it reads at peak USB2 bus rate, which is 30-35MB/sec. The material
being played back on TV, is only requested at 2MB/sec. There are
some AVC formats that play at higher speed, but would be 4K material
as well. If the TV set has a USB3 connector, you know it supports
the whizzy stuff.
Yes, it's quite possible for USB2 sticks, to drop to 1MB/sec on
read, and this happens a day or two before they fail completely :-)
(I had a couple regular USB3 sticks do that.)
Kingston makes a USB3.2 Rev2 stick (not a 2x2), that runs at
700MB/sec when benchmarked. It is wider than a regular stick and
bumps into stuff. Being USB-C on the connector, lots of old kit
will not be plug and play. That's why I am pushing the
Sandisk Extreme Pro, as it has a Type A connector, suited
to more old equipment. TV sets never seem to have good USB.
The Sandisk Extreme Pro (several versions), should manage
to write at 100MB/sec and read at 200MB/sec. Some go faster
than that, but may currently be out of stock.
SDCZ80-032G USB3 port 180MB/sec read (measured)
USB2 port 37MB/sec read (measured - likely UASP, TV is not UASP)
SDCZ800-064G USB3 port 155MB/sec read (measured) Writes ~100 or so.
SDCZ880-128G-G46 USB3 400MB/sec estimated (no stock, design is a couple years old)
(not even an advert at my shop)
That Kingston I mentioned, appears to be a paper-launch here,
as both the big and small one are "out of stock". Having the
advert for them is just a waste of time, unless they have stock.
No, I won't be buying one -- only one of my PCs here has the USB-C
connector so far. My USB3.2 add-on card didn't even have
a USB-C connector.
The problem with stuff like Sandisk Ultra, is write speed.
Takes a while to fill. Still fast enough for TV set reads,
but is an annoying product otherwise. Even the LED pattern
on those is annoying.
I have several Lexar ones here that would rate a "don't bother".
Since USB sticks are built to a price point, it's simply not
possible for the "USB fleet" to impress. They have to suck.
It's a requirement.
Paul
Paul
Jul 19, 2022, 5:42:32 PM7/19/22
to
On 7/19/2022 12:29 PM, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:47:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:47:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 19/07/2022 15:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
>>> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the
>>> most useful.
>>>
>>> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
>>> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>>>
>>> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
>>> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>>>
>>> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
>>> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>>>
>>> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>>
>> That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
>>> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
>>> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the
>>> most useful.
>>>
>>> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
>>> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>>>
>>> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
>>> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>>>
>>> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
>>> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>>>
>>> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>>
>> That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
> The irony being we'd probably not notice if it was 1.8Gb ...
>
The Kingston stick just became available with a Type A connector,
>
so the absurdly fast USB-C flash drive now has a Type A brother.
Won't be in stores quite yet.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/17486/kingston-dtmax-ufd-series-review
It'll probably be months before that appears at my local store.
It draws 2.41W of power, which the TV set 2.5W can provide (5V @ 500mA).
Since the data rate on a USB2 TV is so low, there won't be a speed
component to the power, just idling power in the PHY and such.
So that's to show what the top end of the market can provide. 700MB/sec.
Paul
Paul
Jul 19, 2022, 8:27:49 PM7/19/22
to
On 7/19/2022 12:29 PM, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:47:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 16:47:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 19/07/2022 15:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
>>> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the
>>> most useful.
>>>
>>> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
>>> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>>>
>>> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
>>> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>>>
>>> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
>>> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>>>
>>> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>>
>> That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
>>> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
>>> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the
>>> most useful.
>>>
>>> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
>>> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>>>
>>> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
>>> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>>>
>>> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
>>> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>>>
>>> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>>
>> That sounds like a seriously HD file
>
> The irony being we'd probably not notice if it was 1.8Gb ...
>
Using your desktop PC, you can do a read test on the USB stick.
>
http://www.hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe
[Picture]
https://i.postimg.cc/qMgVQwZ6/HDTune-testing-USB.gif
You can run that on your USB stick, without harming it.
As all it does is read. Only the paid version is R/W.
Paul
Brian Gaff
Jul 20, 2022, 5:22:49 AM7/20/22
to
What is the speed of the usb in the set?
My experience though is that successive updates to firmware tends to slow
the computer inside down or makes it use more Ram as a buffer with the
symptoms you describe, and worse, like even direct connected internet
buffers.
MY Samsung is only just over a year old and its significantly slower than
when new, the time it takes to announce menus and the glitching or cutting
off is also worse, also the latest All four app is inaccessible on the TV
now.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Jethro_uk" <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote in message
news:tb6gt3$3n3kj$4...@dont-email.me...
My experience though is that successive updates to firmware tends to slow
the computer inside down or makes it use more Ram as a buffer with the
symptoms you describe, and worse, like even direct connected internet
buffers.
MY Samsung is only just over a year old and its significantly slower than
when new, the time it takes to announce menus and the glitching or cutting
off is also worse, also the latest All four app is inaccessible on the TV
now.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Jethro_uk" <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote in message
news:tb6gt3$3n3kj$4...@dont-email.me...
> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features". Being
> able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the most
> useful.
>
> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been made
> problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>
> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>
> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering, the
> TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>
> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>
> able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are the most
> useful.
>
> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been made
> problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>
> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a USB
> stick and playing via the TVs input.
>
> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering, the
> TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>
> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>
Andrew
Jul 20, 2022, 5:34:42 AM7/20/22
to
On 19/07/2022 15:59, Jethro_uk wrote:
> We don't watch anything beyond HD as SWMBO doesn't benefit from the
> resolution.
Unless you have a massive TV, then I struggle to understand how
> resolution.
anyone can 'benefit' from the extra resolution.
Peeler
Jul 20, 2022, 5:49:32 AM7/20/22
to
On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 10:22:41 +0100, Brainless & Daft, the notorious,
troll-feeding senile idiot, blathered again:
> What is the speed of the usb in the set?
> My experience though is that successive
My experience is that you are an utterly useless, bullshitting senile
shithead and troll-feeding senile asshole, you pretentious, TV-watching,
pity-arousing senile "blind" mole! <BG>
troll-feeding senile idiot, blathered again:
> What is the speed of the usb in the set?
> My experience though is that successive
shithead and troll-feeding senile asshole, you pretentious, TV-watching,
pity-arousing senile "blind" mole! <BG>
Joe
Jul 20, 2022, 12:08:40 PM7/20/22
to
On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 14:59:47 -0000 (UTC)
Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are
> the most useful.
>
> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>
> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a
> USB stick and playing via the TVs input.
>
> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>
> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>
> Now surely even the most basic and cheap USB stick (this is a
> Sandisk) could support the speeds needed for HD playback at that
> density ? c. 100kb/s ?
>
> I find myself wondering if the heat could have messed things up ?
>
It's certainly possible. 'Digital' electronics is actually analogue,
Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> Our 9 year old LG TV - never a problem - has some "smart features".
> Being able to play media from USB (sticks, drives) and via DNLA are
> the most useful.
>
> Annoyingly the powerline connection to my media box has slowly been
> made problematic with the increasing size of modern media files.
>
> Up until now I have worked around the problem by copying media to a
> USB stick and playing via the TVs input.
>
> However, last night, even that started causing problems - stuttering,
> the TV "jamming" (just hanging and not responding to remote commands).
>
> This was a 3.3Gb file for 1:12:00 playtime.
>
> Now surely even the most basic and cheap USB stick (this is a
> Sandisk) could support the speeds needed for HD playback at that
> density ? c. 100kb/s ?
>
> I find myself wondering if the heat could have messed things up ?
>
just with a tolerance of a very low signal/noise ratio. The books show
you perfect right-angle corners on digital waveforms, the truth is
somewhat different.
I once repaired a digital video device in which someone had fitted an
IC from the wrong manufacturer, causing considerable glitching. This was
quite a while ago, only a 13MHz clock, but probably 18 inches of PCB
trace length. The difference in IC input impedance (not normally
specified for digital ICs) made a considerable change to the shape of
the waveform, and therefore the timing. This sort of thing will vary
with temperature, and it's possible that the recent temperatures have
pushed compatibility between input and output levels and timings over
the working limit.
--
Joe
The Natural Philosopher
Jul 23, 2022, 9:17:27 AM7/23/22
to
On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
> And the DVD player can act as a network media
> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
internet and networked stuff.
The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
the PC can have a decent user interface, it can record, it can play
DVDs, it can get programs off air with a TV card, and it can play
anything on a network it's connected to. All far better than a TV
--
“A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader,
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say,
“We did this ourselves.”
― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
> And the DVD player can act as a network media
> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
internet and networked stuff.
The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
the PC can have a decent user interface, it can record, it can play
DVDs, it can get programs off air with a TV card, and it can play
anything on a network it's connected to. All far better than a TV
--
“A leader is best When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader,
who talks little,When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,They will say,
“We did this ourselves.”
― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
Paul
Jul 23, 2022, 11:59:13 AM7/23/22
to
On 7/23/2022 5:05 AM, Jethro_uk wrote:
> Just as a wee follow up:
>
> Moved the memory stick to play via my DVD player, and it was 100% perfect.
>
> Working theory is that the TV was decoding *and* displaying using the
> same circuitry. Splitting the task "solves" the issue.
>
> Annoyingly I used to have a network media player - a Cyclone - that did
> the job. But when it packed up and a replacement looked hard (and now
> even harder) to source, I fell back on letting the TV do the work.
>
> Not a biggie in the grand scale of things - generally I want my TV to
> just show what it's told. And the DVD player can act as a network media
block in the GPU. The GPU could be inside the processor (Intel QuickSync,
AMD UVD), or in the video card GPU (NVidia Purevideo).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Video_Decoder
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_PureVideo
ARM processors should have some sort of acceleration as well,
to make it easier for a phone to play a video.
At one time, video decode acceleration consisted of IDCT support.
Which is almost no help at all. It helped at the macroblock level,
the blocks of pixels being manipulated in the frequency domain,
to trade off file size and detail (softness).
Today, speed tradeoffs mean that using IDCT is useless, as
the CPU can do discrete cosine transform without that kind of help.
But the above decoders do the whole job. You just DMA packets of
video into the video SIP, and out comes raw pixmaps.
Similarly, the above can have video encoding, and can do single-pass
H264 for example (at 330 FPS). Whereas on your desktop CPU, you can do two-pass
encoding for best results (first pass is a bandwidth estimator pass,
second pass does the encoding, using bandwidth estimates to estimate
when it can make "even better looking" stretches of video).
Like most of the junk in the house, a TV could be from an older
generation with CPU-only solution. Or it could be an ARM with a GPU
block with some of those functions in it. If you can discover
the "secret format" which causes low overhead on the TV CPU, then
the playback could be smoother. But this might also cause
a higher USB2 transfer rate to be needed, and larger files on
the stick.
How you encode, can affect "controls flexibility". A video can be
made more seek-able with bidirectional encoding, but that encoding
might be less common. Some CODECs just aren't good for seeking
at all, and attempts at going backwards can result in the video
playing from zero again.
Your TV is an experimenters paradise, wasting hours to solve problems
like this.
On the decoder table here, MPEG2 and H.264 might be examples of ones
you would want accelerated. And part of the reason, is the number of
sources in your house, that might use those formats. Like, the signal
that comes down the TV antenna, can be converted directly into packets
suited to one of these decoder-things. The only thing the hardware
needs help with, is being told which stream number is the video and
which stream number is the audio (as that can vary with broadcast material).
https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-and-decode-gpu-support-matrix-new
This is incoming from my TV tuner card, giving some idea what a
TV might be tuned for from a decoding perspective. I might have to tell
my computer which streams (marked with arrows) to play.
[mpeg2video @ 0000000004901000] interlaced frame in progressive sequence, ignoring
Duration: 01:04:56.91, start: 1.447051, bitrate: 16153 kb/s
==> Stream #0:0[0xc](eng): Audio: ac3, 48000 Hz, 5.1(side), fltp, 384 kb/s
Stream #0:1[0xd](enm): Audio: ac3, 48000 Hz, stereo, fltp, 192 kb/s (hearing impaired)
==> Stream #0:2[0xe]: Video: mpeg2video, yuv420p(tv), 704x480, max. 24000 kb/s, 29.97 fps, 29.97 tbr, 10000k tbn, 59.94 tbc
Stream #0:3[0xffffffff]: Video: mjpeg, yuvj420p(pc, bt470bg/unknown/unknown), 200x113 [SAR 96:96 DAR 200:113], 90k tbr, 90k tbn, 90k tbc
Metadata: title : TV Thumbnail
Stream #0:4[0xf]: Subtitle: eia_608
Unsupported codec with id 1664495672 for input stream 4
If you transcoded your selection to MPEG2, maybe your TV would like that better.
The video card on my PC, can process an hour of TV content, in six minutes
(to make MPEG2).
If your transcode, happens to not match some automation the TV has,
it might have to switch to CPU decoding. Like some CODECs have multiple
"profiles", and the TV will hate some profiles enough, not to touch them.
Try and find an honest TV manual, with that level of detail...
Sometimes, the manufacturer provides a "list" of supported formats on
some web page, but it might be devoid of preferred profile info.
Making for an incomplete specification. It might include useless
things like DIVX and XVID square aspect, then handle them improperly
and circles are ellipses and so on.
Paul
> Just as a wee follow up:
>
> Moved the memory stick to play via my DVD player, and it was 100% perfect.
>
> Working theory is that the TV was decoding *and* displaying using the
> same circuitry. Splitting the task "solves" the issue.
>
> Annoyingly I used to have a network media player - a Cyclone - that did
> the job. But when it packed up and a replacement looked hard (and now
> even harder) to source, I fell back on letting the TV do the work.
>
> Not a biggie in the grand scale of things - generally I want my TV to
> just show what it's told. And the DVD player can act as a network media
> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
>
On computers, video can be completely decoded by a video encode/decode
> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
>
block in the GPU. The GPU could be inside the processor (Intel QuickSync,
AMD UVD), or in the video card GPU (NVidia Purevideo).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Quick_Sync_Video
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Video_Decoder
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_PureVideo
ARM processors should have some sort of acceleration as well,
to make it easier for a phone to play a video.
At one time, video decode acceleration consisted of IDCT support.
Which is almost no help at all. It helped at the macroblock level,
the blocks of pixels being manipulated in the frequency domain,
to trade off file size and detail (softness).
Today, speed tradeoffs mean that using IDCT is useless, as
the CPU can do discrete cosine transform without that kind of help.
But the above decoders do the whole job. You just DMA packets of
video into the video SIP, and out comes raw pixmaps.
Similarly, the above can have video encoding, and can do single-pass
H264 for example (at 330 FPS). Whereas on your desktop CPU, you can do two-pass
encoding for best results (first pass is a bandwidth estimator pass,
second pass does the encoding, using bandwidth estimates to estimate
when it can make "even better looking" stretches of video).
Like most of the junk in the house, a TV could be from an older
generation with CPU-only solution. Or it could be an ARM with a GPU
block with some of those functions in it. If you can discover
the "secret format" which causes low overhead on the TV CPU, then
the playback could be smoother. But this might also cause
a higher USB2 transfer rate to be needed, and larger files on
the stick.
How you encode, can affect "controls flexibility". A video can be
made more seek-able with bidirectional encoding, but that encoding
might be less common. Some CODECs just aren't good for seeking
at all, and attempts at going backwards can result in the video
playing from zero again.
Your TV is an experimenters paradise, wasting hours to solve problems
like this.
On the decoder table here, MPEG2 and H.264 might be examples of ones
you would want accelerated. And part of the reason, is the number of
sources in your house, that might use those formats. Like, the signal
that comes down the TV antenna, can be converted directly into packets
suited to one of these decoder-things. The only thing the hardware
needs help with, is being told which stream number is the video and
which stream number is the audio (as that can vary with broadcast material).
https://developer.nvidia.com/video-encode-and-decode-gpu-support-matrix-new
This is incoming from my TV tuner card, giving some idea what a
TV might be tuned for from a decoding perspective. I might have to tell
my computer which streams (marked with arrows) to play.
[mpeg2video @ 0000000004901000] interlaced frame in progressive sequence, ignoring
Duration: 01:04:56.91, start: 1.447051, bitrate: 16153 kb/s
==> Stream #0:0[0xc](eng): Audio: ac3, 48000 Hz, 5.1(side), fltp, 384 kb/s
Stream #0:1[0xd](enm): Audio: ac3, 48000 Hz, stereo, fltp, 192 kb/s (hearing impaired)
==> Stream #0:2[0xe]: Video: mpeg2video, yuv420p(tv), 704x480, max. 24000 kb/s, 29.97 fps, 29.97 tbr, 10000k tbn, 59.94 tbc
Stream #0:3[0xffffffff]: Video: mjpeg, yuvj420p(pc, bt470bg/unknown/unknown), 200x113 [SAR 96:96 DAR 200:113], 90k tbr, 90k tbn, 90k tbc
Metadata: title : TV Thumbnail
Stream #0:4[0xf]: Subtitle: eia_608
Unsupported codec with id 1664495672 for input stream 4
If you transcoded your selection to MPEG2, maybe your TV would like that better.
The video card on my PC, can process an hour of TV content, in six minutes
(to make MPEG2).
If your transcode, happens to not match some automation the TV has,
it might have to switch to CPU decoding. Like some CODECs have multiple
"profiles", and the TV will hate some profiles enough, not to touch them.
Try and find an honest TV manual, with that level of detail...
Sometimes, the manufacturer provides a "list" of supported formats on
some web page, but it might be devoid of preferred profile info.
Making for an incomplete specification. It might include useless
things like DIVX and XVID square aspect, then handle them improperly
and circles are ellipses and so on.
Paul
Andrew
Jul 23, 2022, 12:07:47 PM7/23/22
to
On 23/07/2022 14:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> And the DVD player can act as a network media
>> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
>> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
>
> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
> internet and networked stuff.
>
> The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
> the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
>
> In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
>
And for GB News it doesn't even need to show anything in HD
> On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> And the DVD player can act as a network media
>> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
>> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
>
> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
> internet and networked stuff.
>
> The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
> the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
>
> In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
>
RJH
Jul 24, 2022, 12:44:00 AM7/24/22
to
On 23 Jul 2022 at 10:05:09 BST, Jethro_uk wrote:
> Just as a wee follow up:
>
> Moved the memory stick to play via my DVD player, and it was 100% perfect.
>
> Working theory is that the TV was decoding *and* displaying using the
> same circuitry. Splitting the task "solves" the issue.
>
> Annoyingly I used to have a network media player - a Cyclone - that did
> the job. But when it packed up and a replacement looked hard (and now
> even harder) to source, I fell back on letting the TV do the work.
>
> Not a biggie in the grand scale of things - generally I want my TV to
> just show what it's told. And the DVD player can act as a network media
> Just as a wee follow up:
>
> Moved the memory stick to play via my DVD player, and it was 100% perfect.
>
> Working theory is that the TV was decoding *and* displaying using the
> same circuitry. Splitting the task "solves" the issue.
>
> Annoyingly I used to have a network media player - a Cyclone - that did
> the job. But when it packed up and a replacement looked hard (and now
> even harder) to source, I fell back on letting the TV do the work.
>
> Not a biggie in the grand scale of things - generally I want my TV to
> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
My 5ish year old LG 43UJ670V plays just about anything from the ethernetted
> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
NAS using the native 'Photos and Videos' app. And it's quite a clean
interface, bit like a file explorer. But it's quirky - can't select language
on multitracked videos for example. For those I use the Plex app on the LG.
I'd use Plex all the time but the updating is erratic - the native app updates
in real time as I add files.
I only use the USB (SSD in a caddy) for live pausing etc and programmed
recording from the guide - seems to work fine (in the sense it's never not
worked).
As an aside, the whole thing has become very snappy since I replaced the NAS
HDs with some enterprise 8TB 7200s. I'd always thought the TV was the
limitation.
--
Cheers, Rob
RJH
Jul 24, 2022, 12:46:36 AM7/24/22
to
On 23 Jul 2022 at 17:31:44 BST, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 14:17:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> [quoted text muted]
> I'd be a happy bunny.
I like LG's magic remote but I know it doesn't suit everyone.
--
Cheers, Rob
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 14:17:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>
>> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
>> internet and networked stuff.
>
> If I could get a decent remote to work with a PC (more likely laptop)
>> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
>> internet and networked stuff.
>
> I'd be a happy bunny.
I like LG's magic remote but I know it doesn't suit everyone.
--
Cheers, Rob
The Natural Philosopher
Jul 24, 2022, 1:51:04 AM7/24/22
to
On 23/07/2022 17:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 14:17:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 14:17:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> [quoted text muted]
>>
>> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
>> internet and networked stuff.
>
>> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
>> internet and networked stuff.
>
> If I could get a decent remote to work with a PC (more likely laptop)
> I'd be a happy bunny.
You can get a remote keyboard with built in mouse pad, or a remote mouse
> I'd be a happy bunny.
only - used for lectures set with a projection screen
I bought a keyboard for exactly this. Used on stock TVs it works, but
the TVs still are rotten computers
--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.
Anon.
Vir Campestris
Jul 24, 2022, 12:23:45 PM7/24/22
to
On 23/07/2022 14:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
> internet and networked stuff.
>
> The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
> the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
>
> In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
>
> the PC can have a decent user interface, it can record, it can play
> DVDs, it can get programs off air with a TV card, and it can play
> anything on a network it's connected to. All far better than a TV
Not all TVs are created equal. Some of them don't even use a browser.
> internet and networked stuff.
>
> The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
> the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
>
> In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
>
> the PC can have a decent user interface, it can record, it can play
> DVDs, it can get programs off air with a TV card, and it can play
> anything on a network it's connected to. All far better than a TV
But even though I've worked on them I'm inclined to use them as a
display only, and use a dedicated STB for decode etc. One day the one I
have here will cease to handle streams well enough, and will get retired
to display only.
And no, I won't tell you who I worked for.
Andy
alan_m
Jul 24, 2022, 4:27:42 PM7/24/22
to
On 23/07/2022 14:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 23/07/2022 10:05, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> And the DVD player can act as a network media
>> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
>> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
>
> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
> internet and networked stuff.
>
> The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
> the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
>
> In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
>
> the PC can have a decent user interface, it can record, it can play
> DVDs, it can get programs off air with a TV card, and it can play
> anything on a network it's connected to. All far better than a TV
Some of the SMART features on a TV seem to be designed for a touch
>> And the DVD player can act as a network media
>> player, it's just a question of dealing with the interface. Which is
>> gawdawful (Panasonic !).
>
> This is why my next step will be to employ PC's instead of STBs to do
> internet and networked stuff.
>
> The so called 'smart TV;s have browsers they are about 40 years behind
> the curve, and a user interface that somp0ly doesn't work.
>
> In short all the TV has to do is be a sound and vision output device
>
> the PC can have a decent user interface, it can record, it can play
> DVDs, it can get programs off air with a TV card, and it can play
> anything on a network it's connected to. All far better than a TV
screen - a bit difficult when sat normally for watching TV.
--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk
Vir Campestris
Jul 25, 2022, 4:29:12 PM7/25/22
to
On 24/07/2022 21:27, alan_m wrote:
> Some of the SMART features on a TV seem to be designed for a touch
> screen - a bit difficult when sat normally for watching TV.
Ah, not impossible. Some of them run Android.
> Some of the SMART features on a TV seem to be designed for a touch
> screen - a bit difficult when sat normally for watching TV.
Andy
0 new messages