Windows 8.1 and Codec Packs


Recommended Posts

Boo Berry

I'm too lazy to manually installing the LAV filters or anything else. Is MPC-HC releasing stable versions with the built-ins yet? I've been using CCCP for years just not to deal with the hassle and because it was the one codec pack that didn't cause other misc. issues.

Yes, the latest stable builds contain the internal LAV Filters now. I don't need to install anything additional now - just MPC-HC and madVR and I can play any audio/video format.

 

 

What? There are different editions and you can chose every codec or utility installed, also MMSwitch has been out from the pack for a long, long while, I think that was used back in the XP days. The latest Mega pack uses LAV/ffdshow and the only utilities selected are codec tweak tool, mediainfo lite and graphstudionext. I really can't see anything bad in it, it even offers a LAV-only configuration (plus it's both x86 and x64). I also don't see how it could be the worst and CCCP the best when on many websites CCCP has lower review averages than K-lite packs.

There's no point to install codec packs (unless you absolutely insist on using WMP, ugh) as MPC-HC includes internal LAV Filters now - it should be everything you need. Besides MPC-HC there's always VLC and PotPlayer, among other players. So why install unnecessary bloat that's known to potentially cause issues and crashes? Just because K-Lite has higher user reviews on download sites (only because it's most popular), doesn't account for its countless known issues and crashes it can cause. Did you read what the Microsoft employee said about using codec packs? I happen to agree 100% in this case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
snaphat (Myles Landwehr)

Yes, the latest stable builds contain the internal LAV Filters now. I don't need to install anything additional now - just MPC-HC and madVR and I can play any audio/video format.

Very cool, I think I will try that out instead of CCCP moving forward. I think in practice it will end up being more up-to-date in both the MPC-HC and LAV filters versions. CCCP always took quite a long time to release new versions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luc2k
So why install unnecessary bloat that's known to potentially cause issues and crashes? Just because K-Lite has higher user reviews on download sites (only because it's most popular), doesn't account for its countless known issues and crashes it can cause. Did you read what the Microsoft employee said about using codec packs? I happen to agree 100% in this case.

I think your and his views about K-Lite being buggy and crashing stuff are several years outdated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Andre S.

I think your and his views about K-Lite being buggy and crashing stuff are several years outdated.

Popular media players come with all necessary and up-to-date codecs built-in. The best a codec pack can do is not cause any problems but that's not a great reason for installing software.

Link to post
Share on other sites
francescob

There's no point to install codec packs (unless you absolutely insist on using WMP, ugh) as MPC-HC includes internal LAV Filters now - it should be everything you need. Besides MPC-HC there's always VLC and PotPlayer, among other players. So why install unnecessary bloat that's known to potentially cause issues and crashes? Just because K-Lite has higher user reviews on download sites (only because it's most popular), doesn't account for its countless known issues and crashes it can cause. Did you read what the Microsoft employee said about using codec packs? I happen to agree 100% in this case.

 

I read the discussion but it was regarding crashes during the early Vista days, where a lot of codecs (and a many other softwares) had issues with it. K-lite has always been orders of magnitude more popular than the others, especially when it could play both QuickTime and RealMedia files (of which unfortunately the internet was flooded with) so it's perfectly normal that with several times more downloads it caused an higher number of crashes, but the people that maintain the pack have always been obsessively picking the best codec for each task (reason for which now it's mostly LAV). The real problem were actually the codecs: ffdshow and amateurish filters were a true mess back then, and it was the main reason why the K-lite pack kept shipping with commercial powerdvd/quicktime/realplayer/divx components as long as possible, until they started getting takedown requests that forced them to gradually switch to opensource codecs. I've never personally had issues with it though, I installed it on a lot of machines, always used the playback-only versions (standard) with default (no player) settings, but I've never seen any increase in crashes or had anybody complaining.

 

That said codec packs are not only if you want to use WMP, but also Movie Maker, DVD maker or other software that uses directshow to load videos. Or simply if you just hate the VLC/PotPlayer/MPC-HC ffmpegish quality, because the postprocessing quality of the LAV codecs or official DIVX codecs is generally much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

That said codec packs are not only if you want to use WMP, but also Movie Maker, DVD maker or other software that uses directshow to load videos. Or simply if you just hate the VLC/PotPlayer/MPC-HC ffmpegish quality, because the postprocessing quality of the LAV codecs or official DIVX codecs is generally much better.

In that case, why not install what you need e.g. ffdshow and/or LAV Filters. Does this not accomplish the same result in the end but with less bloat installed compared to the 'standard' codec pack?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luc2k

Popular media players come with all necessary and up-to-date codecs built-in. The best a codec pack can do is not cause any problems but that's not a great reason for installing software.

And I agree with that. The problem is that he makes it sound like K-Lite will "horribly murder" one's PC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

And I agree with that. The problem is that he makes it sound like K-Lite will "horribly murder" one's PC.

That's over exaggerating a bit much, don't you think? My point is there's no reason to install codec packs like K-Lite when there's already better solutions like MPC-HC, PotPlayer and VLC especially when you take into account the possible issues that can be caused by installing codec packs. To me, that risk no matter how negligible it may seem, is still not worth it. I'm not saying installing a codec pack is going to ruin your Windows install or hardware. At the very worst it could potentially do is crash your media player(s) or cause other little nuances.

Link to post
Share on other sites
francescob

In that case, why not install what you need e.g. ffdshow and/or LAV Filters. Does this not accomplish the same result in the end but with less bloat installed compared to the 'standard' codec pack?

Because that's exactly what the K-Lite setup does when you install it with default settings (you can pick between the best mix of ffshow/LAV picked by their community or LAV-only). It also fixes broken codecs, has the Icarus thumbnails generator, allows setting up hardware acceleration and associations and has those nice tools for video informations. Only the stuff you select is actually installed so it doesn't really add any extra bloat. Consider it as a proper setup for LAV filters, that's what it is nowadays (plus protected DVD playback on Win8/XP that you wouldn't get with just the LAV codecs).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

Because that's exactly what the K-Lite setup does when you install it with default settings (you can pick between the best mix of ffshow/LAV picked by their community or LAV-only). It also fixes broken codecs, has the Icarus thumbnails generator, allows setting up hardware acceleration and associations and has those nice tools for video informations. Only the stuff you select is actually installed so it doesn't really add any extra bloat. Consider it as a proper setup for LAV filters, that's what it is nowadays (plus protected DVD playback on Win8/XP).

I happen to know it detects "broken" codecs that aren't actually broken, e.g. JRiver's codecs. At the very least, it's not accurate and thus I'd take any broken codecs it detects with a grain of salt. And again ultimately what's the point when you can install ffdshow and/or LAV Filters to achieve the same result?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luc2k

That's over exaggerating a bit much, don't you think? My point is there's no reason to install codec packs like K-Lite when there's already better solutions like MPC-HC, PotPlayer and VLC especially when you take into account the possible issues that can be caused by installing codec packs. To me, that risk no matter how negligible it may seem, is still not worth it. I'm not saying installing a codec pack is going to ruin your Windows install or hardware. At the very worst it could potentially do is crash your media player(s) or cause other little nuances.

Yeah, that's why I used quotes. You must understand I find your position on the issues it causes hard to swallow when I've used the thing for years (quite a few without a problem) and the guy you're agreeing with bases his opinion on something that happened in 2007 (or 2009, I forgot).

 

And to repeat myself, I DO AGREE there's no need to install it if you use modern players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

Are codec packs actually needed in this day and age considering they mostly bundle ffdshow/LAV Filters? Would it be better to use ffdshow/LAV Filters from the sources instead? Serious question here. With codec packs if there's a bug with the codecs used (ffdshow/LAV Filters) or MPC-HC itself we have to wait for an update from the codec/MPC-HC developer(s) and the codec pack developer(s) whereas if we use the straight ffdshow/LAV Filters and there's a bug with the codecs and the codec author(s) can issue a bugfix release and we can upgrade from there. I like the lack of the middleman approach in this case.

 

Another thing I don't like about codec packs (at least K-Lite and Shark007, never checked CCCP) is they seem to release new pack updates containing experimental nightly builds of MPC-HC and/or the codecs themselves (never really investigated codecs in this case, however in the case of MPC-HC builds it's true according to changelogs). Is this really a good idea for end-users? Could this contribute to the issues mentioned attributed to installing a codec pack and experiencing crashes and other issues actually be due to these potentially unstable builds being used?

Link to post
Share on other sites
francescob

I happen to know it detects "broken" codecs that aren't actually broken, e.g. JRiver's codecs. At the very least, it's not accurate and thus I'd take any broken codecs it detects with a grain of salt. And again ultimately what's the point when you can install ffdshow and/or LAV Filters to achieve the same result?

As I said the point is having a proper setup and tools to allow all the proper codec configuration plus protected DVD playback and thumbnails generation, all in a single package. The LAV filters setup is pretty basic if you haven't noticed (same for ffdshow).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

And that's another issue I have with a few codec packs, they seem to be using Icaros for thumbnail generation. I've experienced multiple issues with Icaros in the past. For thumbnails, I use Media Preview as it actually works best for me without zero issues (Media Preview v1.4 was literally just released as I was typing this reply) and it's superior to Icaros.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Art_X
 

is my set up of choice and it plays everything, and if you want thumbnails of files MKV/OGG etc you can add Icaros to the mix too

And that's another issue I have with a few codec packs, they seem to be using Icaros for thumbnail generation. I've experienced multiple issues with Icaros in the past. For thumbnails, I use Media Preview as it actually works best for me without zero issues (Media Preview v1.4 was literally just released as I was typing this reply) and it's superior to Icaros.

Can't say I have ever had an issue with it, what were the problems you were having?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Luc2k

As I said the point is having a proper setup and tools to allow all the proper codec configuration plus protected DVD playback and thumbnails generation, all in a single package. The LAV filters setup is pretty basic if you haven't noticed (same for ffdshow).

I also believe it cleans itself quite nicely when removed. Haven't manually installed the codecs or software it comes with but I doubt everything is as thorough.

 

And that's another issue I have with a few codec packs, they seem to be using Icaros for thumbnail generation. I've experienced multiple issues with Icaros in the past. For thumbnails, I use Media Preview as it actually works best for me without zero issues (Media Preview v1.4 was literally just released as I was typing this reply).

It's optional though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

and if you want thumbnails of files MKV/OGG etc you can add Icaros to the mix too

Try Media Preview, it's better than Icaros for thumbnail generation and customization.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Art_X

always used Codec Tweak Tool - to change how the thumbs look, does what Media Preview does, slowly moving over to Linux anyway, but thought I would say what I use, most times its best to keep it simple, less can go wrong that way :p (watches to make sure nothing goes wrong now :shiftyninja: )

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

I hope Media Preview is ported over to Linux (there's a poll about it on their forums), as using ffmpeg for thumbnail generation on Linux can be a pain in the rear. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Art_X

Guess i have been lucky so far as it makes thumbs for every video I have :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
LaP

Wondering if I put MPC-HC x64 on, that is all I need.

 

Yes

 

I've not used a codec pack for years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LUTZIFER

Shark007 is the best imo, although I don't use it any more since I have Windows 8.1 installed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boo Berry

Shark007 is the best imo, although I don't use it any more since I have Windows 8.1 installed.

I have to respectfully disagree. In the past I've personally encountered and my friends have encountered multiple issues with the Shark007 pack, in particular it's configuration process breaking stuff for me in the past when testing. Nonetheless my biggest complaint about Shark007's codecs is the bundled adware and the lack of configuration when installing the x64 codecs. Of course I base this opinion on past experience, as I haven't touched this codec pack in years and nor will I ever again. :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
BoDEAN

Thanks for all the replies

Link to post
Share on other sites
paxa

+1 this is all you need. anything else...is just junk in you system. i personally can view 10bit content, dvd's, and pretty much everything else with this combo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.