• AnyStream is having some DRM issues currently, Netflix is not available in HD for the time being.
    Situations like this will always happen with AnyStream: streaming providers are continuously improving their countermeasures while we try to catch up, it's an ongoing cat-and-mouse game. Please be patient and don't flood our support or forum with requests, we are working on it 24/7 to get it resolved. Thank you.

CBR

Of course you can turn up the encoding complexity of the CBR video and put lots and lots of CPU power into the encoding ... then it might result in better quality.
But as I mentioned before, given the same circumstances, VBR yields the better quality on the same filesize as CBR ... period.
Google it ... "compare CBR vs VBR"
I watched both, and if I didn't know which one was CBR and which one was VBR I really could tell the difference, but I am not watching on an expensive big screen 4K TV, I am watching on an old 50" Sony TV. No bells and whistles.
 
I should mention, that the selected bitrate is WAY too low for 4K, but you can better make out the differences
 
This was a good discussion thread, but I asked people not to post links twice, I edited one post and I allowed another because I knew where the link was going but as we all know, clicking on the link that we are not positive of the destination is not a good idea for obvious reasons. I'll ask one more time for people to edit their posts or I will do it. I hope everyone understands that unknown links can be dangerous. I am not accusing anyone of anything. Its just a bad practice.
 
This was a good discussion thread, but I asked people not to post links twice, I edited one post and I allowed another because I knew where the link was going but as we all know, clicking on the link that we are not positive of the destination is not a good idea for obvious reasons. I'll ask one more time for people to edit their posts or I will do it. I hope everyone understands that unknown links can be dangerous. I am not accusing anyone of anything. Its just a bad practice.
Are you referring to the links I posted? I changed that now ... that is my own website, I manage all that's on it.

Actually you can hover with yout mouse over a link to see where it's going.

What is much worse, that I can write anything in the link description ... I could create a link that says "google.com" but links to malicious site ...

Long story short: always watch what you click, either by mouseover or context menu (y)

Now back to topic...
 
And just to prove my point, I took a short 4K video and encoded it with Nvidias H.265 (because I didn't want to wait forever)
Both are almost the same size (2% difference) and were encoded with the same parameters, the only difference is CBR and VBR.

yeah, also no 4k display here, just a few years old 1080p TV. honestly, they both look ok. i think i did see slight blockiness on the VBR one @0m:04s, around the clouds just beneath the dome, which was less noticable on CBR one. in my experience, these types of situations are the main difference between CBR and VBR. as mentioned before, leaves blowing in the wind, wavy water surface, etc.
 
Last edited:
yeah, also no 4k display here, just a few years old 1080p TV. honestly, they both look ok. i think i did see slight blockiness on the VBR one @0m:04s, around the clouds just beneath the dome, which was less noticable on CBR one. in my experience, these types of situations are the main difference between CBR and VBR. as mentioned before, leaves blowing in the wind, wavy water surface, etc.
Wait, what?
You didn't notice the huge difference around 0:25s where the CBR motion is all blocky and VBR looks way better? That should even be visible on a 1080p display...
 
Wait, what?
You didn't notice the huge difference around 0:25s where the CBR motion is all blocky and VBR looks way better? That should even be visible on a 1080p display...

I agree the CBR is blocky but not so much, the VBR is way better. Good presentation.
 
I think the whole "CBR is better than VBR" is just an archaic hangover from the old days when you had a choice of CBR or ABR... Nowadays hardly anybody codes for ABR, most, if not all, code for scene complexity (CRF or whatever acronym the specific encoder uses), yet the myths of distant path continue to cast long shadows...

Just for kicks: on occasion (when I have really nothing better to do) I would do a CRF first pass and a second pass with ABR, and while the second pass will yield a better allocation in high frequency scenes the difference is not worth the 180% encoding time penalty (third pass yields no statically/observably significant difference), and I know what parameters to crank up on the encoder to yield a huge (13Mbps H264/Prime@VBR -> 2Mbps H265@CRF21) bitrate reduction with imperceivable loss of quality even if it takes 24 hours or so per 40 minute 1080p title when you throw all computing power at it that it can take, the `slow' preset of x265 results in 4.1Mbps@CRF21 on the same title and completes in 3 hours on the same hardware, just for reference...
 
Last edited:
I think the whole "CBR is better than VBR" is just an archaic hangover from the old days when you had a choice of CBR or ABR... Nowadays hardly anybody codes for ABR, most, if not all, code for scene complexity (CRF or whatever acronym the specific encoder uses), yet the myths of distant path continue to cast long shadows...

Just for kicks: on occasion (when I have really nothing better to do and) I would do a CRF first pass and a second pass with ABR, and while the second pass will yield a better allocation in high frequency scenes the difference is not worth the 180% encoding time penalty (third pass yields no statically/observably significant difference), and I know what parameters to crank up on the encoder to yield a huge (13Mbps H264/Prime@VBR -> 2Mbps H265@CRF21) bitrate reduction with imperceivable loss of quality even if it takes 24 hours or so per 40 minute 1080p title when you throw all computing power at it that it can take, the `slow' preset of x265 results in 4.1Mbps@CRF21 on the same title and completes in 3 hours on the same hardware, just for reference...
I learned a lot from reading all your posts, I appreciate your sharing your knowledge in this thread. Thank you. I am not a developer, I never stated that I was, but I like to learn, and reading your posts and explanations taught me a lot. Thank you.
 
Wait, what?
You didn't notice the huge difference around 0:25s where the CBR motion is all blocky and VBR looks way better? That should even be visible on a 1080p display...

Yup, I didn't notice the difference at first until I full-screened the video on my 1080p laptop and the Films & TV app (or Movies & TV app, depending on your locale) put the screen in 'showroom' mode (crank up brightness, my "work" brightness is +10% (1st notch)).
 
Wait, what?
You didn't notice the huge difference around 0:25s where the CBR motion is all blocky and VBR looks way better? That should even be visible on a 1080p display...

ahahaa, didnt even think clips were longer than 15-20sec max. but yeah, did notice blockiness @ 25s. in both examples. CBR was more obvious, of course. the cure would be to crank the bitrate slider to gorillion. no more problems for CBR. but of course, filesize would be ridiculous. therefore, for providers VBR is a logical choice. less data, less bandwidth, less cost. but then again, providers should do a better job imo. for now, from my experiences, theres no way streaming will ever replace not only ownership of physical media, but also renting of said physical media. maybe it changes in the future, but for now i give providers (and ive tried almost every single one available in the US - dunno, maybe BBC or ITV did a better job), taking everything into an account (availability, cost, flexibility, catalog size, subtitles, audio and video quality), a C.

C+ if im feeling generous. but, thats just me. i am impressed, though, with what some providers have done with certain titles, the coding magic they did. on the other hand, ill never forget or fogrive the shoddy job they did with married with children, 3rd rock from the sun, frasier and all those older shows. scrubs, roseanne etc. now we have top notch quality for pure cringe like desus&muro, the conners and all that marxist woke tripe netflix (and now hulu and amazon, and soon every other provider, no doubt) serves on regular basis, but have to enjoy interlaced, blocky, lq cult shows such as mwc or frasier. oh, well. here i go, ranting again. anyways, cheers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DQ
ahahaa, didnt even think clips were longer than 15-20sec max. but yeah, did notice blockiness @ 25s. in both examples. CBR was more obvious, of course. the cure would be to crank the bitrate slider to gorillion. no more problems for CBR. but of course, filesize would be ridiculous. therefore, for providers VBR is a logical choice. less data, less bandwidth, less cost. but then again, providers should do a better job imo. for now, from my experiences, theres no way streaming will ever replace not only ownership of physical media, but also renting of said physical media. maybe it changes in the future, but for now i give providers (and ive tried almost every single one available in the US - dunno, maybe BBC or ITV did a better job), taking everything into an account (availability, cost, flexibility, catalog size, subtitles, audio and video quality), a C.

C+ if im feeling generous. but, thats just me. i am impressed, though, with what some providers have done with certain titles, the coding magic they did. on the other hand, ill never forget or fogrive the shoddy job they did with married with children, 3rd rock from the sun, frasier and all those older shows. scrubs, roseanne etc. now we have top notch quality for pure cringe like desus&muro, the conners and all that marxist woke tripe netflix (and now hulu and amazon, and soon every other provider, no doubt) serves on regular basis, but have to enjoy interlaced, blocky, lq cult shows such as mwc or frasier. oh, well. here i go, ranting again. anyways, cheers!

Because of the stuff you mention I rarely consume anything past 2010. Now and then I can find something new I like but most often I watch stuff from pre-2000's . But I can rant along with you that when I do often times get my hands on something older that I have been hunting down the quality is often bad. Although now and then you get a pleasant surprise. For example, "Unforgiven" in 4k is a treat not to be missed.
 
ahahaa, didnt even think clips were longer than 15-20sec max. but yeah, did notice blockiness @ 25s. in both examples. CBR was more obvious, of course. the cure would be to crank the bitrate slider to gorillion. no more problems for CBR. but of course, filesize would be ridiculous. therefore, for providers VBR is a logical choice. less data, less bandwidth, less cost. but then again, providers should do a better job imo. for now, from my experiences, theres no way streaming will ever replace not only ownership of physical media, but also renting of said physical media. maybe it changes in the future, but for now i give providers (and ive tried almost every single one available in the US - dunno, maybe BBC or ITV did a better job), taking everything into an account (availability, cost, flexibility, catalog size, subtitles, audio and video quality), a C.

C+ if im feeling generous. but, thats just me. i am impressed, though, with what some providers have done with certain titles, the coding magic they did. on the other hand, ill never forget or fogrive the shoddy job they did with married with children, 3rd rock from the sun, frasier and all those older shows. scrubs, roseanne etc. now we have top notch quality for pure cringe like desus&muro, the conners and all that marxist woke tripe netflix (and now hulu and amazon, and soon every other provider, no doubt) serves on regular basis, but have to enjoy interlaced, blocky, lq cult shows such as mwc or frasier. oh, well. here i go, ranting again. anyways, cheers!
So we are all in agreement, VBR is the way to go. No doubts.
 
You obviously don't understand what we are talking about because no one said anything about re-encoding an Amazon download. We are talking about untouched CBR vs VBR and the strict quality guidelines always is in favor of CBR when it involves Amazon. I have compared any stream VBR versus the other method of getting the CBR.
 
You obviously don't understand what we are talking about because no one said anything about re-encoding an Amazon download. We are talking about untouched CBR vs VBR and the strict quality guidelines always is in favor of CBR when it involves Amazon. I have compared any stream VBR versus the other method of getting the CBR.
I understand exactly what you are talking about and that's my opinion, if you don't agree that's okay with me. This is why call it a discussion.:dance:
 
You obviously don't understand what we are talking about because no one said anything about re-encoding an Amazon download. We are talking about untouched CBR vs VBR and the strict quality guidelines always is in favor of CBR when it involves Amazon. I have compared any stream VBR versus the other method of getting the CBR.

So, according to you, scenes where VBR spends way more bits/frame in high frequency scenes look worse than CBR? I don't think there's a word to describe that logic...

Edit: also, what are these "strict quality guidelines," are they found somewhere in the wild, or do they live in someone's head where nobody but that person can access; why talk in opaque terms? You want to say why X is better than Y, you have to be able to quantify it, not simply qualify with "it's better, m-okay?!"
 
I don't really want to wade into this, but there's a lot of misinformation here. The reason CBR is being championed over VBR has less to do with bitrates and everything to do with Amazon's own encode settings. This is the reason you see people refer to Amazon VBR 1.0 vs VBR 2.0 encode settings profiles, they intentionally made VBR worse in 2.0 and left CBR intact. No comparison you do yourself can possible be accurate because the crux of the issue is that Amazon gimps their own VBR stream with worse x264 settings, whereas the CBR stream is encoded mostly correctly. Even if the CBR and VBR streams were both identical bitrates the CBR one would be better in aggregate over the course of the movie because the actual encoding settings are better. So yes, while VBR might have occasional massive bitrate spikes that make those brief seconds better quality, it's also has bitrate drops, and the encode settings are worse, so overall CBR is better for 99% of the movie.

This has been been demonstrated hundreds if not thousands of times over in movie after movie on sites that aren't this one and which aren't allowed to be mentioned here. The AnyStream developers are of course welcome to not add CBR support, it's their product after all, but random users arguing that VBR is better because "reasons" without actually understanding what's going on behind the scenes is counterproductive and adds nothing to the discussion.

That's my two cents, and I'll stay out of it now. The devs know the difference I'm sure, and they can decide what's best for them and for their product.
 
Last edited:
I don't really want to wade into this, but there's a lot of misinformation here. The reason CBR is being championed over VBR has less to do with bitrates and everything to do with Amazon's own encode settings. This is the reason you see people refer to Amazon VBR 1.0 vs VBR 2.0 encode settings profiles, they intentionally made VBR worse in 2.0 and left CBR intact. No comparison you do yourself can possible be accurate because the crux of the issue is that Amazon gimps their own VBR stream with worse x264 settings, whereas the CBR stream is encoded mostly correctly. Even if the CBR and VBR streams were both identical bitrates the CBR one would be better in aggregate over the course of the movie because the actual encoding settings are better. So yes, while VBR might have occasional massive bitrate spikes that make those brief seconds better quality, it's also has bitrate drops, and the encode settings are worse, so overall CBR is better for 99% of the movie.

This has been been demonstrated hundreds if not thousands of times over in movie after movie on sites that aren't this one and which aren't allowed to be mentioned here. The AnyStream developers are of course welcome to not add CBR support, it's their product after all, but random users arguing that VBR is better because "reasons" without actually understanding what's going on behind the scenes is counterproductive and adds nothing to the discussion.

That's my two cents, and I'll stay out of it now. The devs know the different I'm sure, and they can decide what's best for them and for their product.

Despite "This has been been demonstrated hundreds if not thousands of times over in movie after movie" nobody but people who but compare stills complain... Even Dark Shikari (one of the x264 core devs) keeps pointing out (on doom9) the fallacy of comparing still pictures over a contiguous film.

Again, according to your logic, Prime decided to deliberately crapify ("they intentionally made VBR worse in 2.0") their customers' experience... Have you ever heard the saying "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? Well, if you haven't there it is. Put up objective quantitative evidence, or go arm wave in front of a mirror... You are literally arguing by reference to a third-party evidence of questionable provenance, engineer or scientist you are not...
 
Back
Top