Resolve limited to 192kbps audio - Bug or limitation?

The free edition of Resolve 15 seems to be limited to 192kbps audio afaik.

I was not sure if this was a bug or if this is a limitation of using the free edition of the program. Can someone make this clear please?

Or 192Khz?

If so, that's the maximum sample rate for most in the industry. 48khz is standard for film/video. 44.1khz for CD quality.

Unfortunately, 192 Kb/s is the max for AAC audio even in the Studio version.

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=96953

Unfortunately, 192 Kb/s is the max for AAC audio even in the Studio version

On macOS, AAC exports in Studio may be specified with a data rate of 320Kb/s and a bit depth of 32bit.

So what is the reason on Windows its just 192 if its possible on Mac? I was also wondering about this point before and why it can't be higher. Or at least there should be another compressed format that allows 320 kbps.

AFAIK the H264 encoder/decoder is using the one that's available through the OS itself. If you need something else then render out a master and compress with another software.

H264 encoder/decoder is using the one that's available through the OS itself.

If that truly limits what we can do here, then BMD needs to redesign things to include the missing capabilities.

Interestingly, the native encoder options mimic exactly the dreaded QuickTime encoder options - in Windows. Imagine the horror - QuickTime is the system encoder in Windows.

Sent from my GM 5 Plus d using Tapatalk

It all depends what encoder the software is using, what flavor of aac is being generated (their are multiple), the sample rate, the number of channels, the container, and if memory serves their are also some standards that dictate maximums.

If that truly limits what we can do here, then BMD needs to redesign things to include the missing capabilities.

How much more do you want to pay for a third party decoder/encoder?

I gave up on the default encoder on my windows machine. Myffmpg is very inexpensive GUI for ffmpeg and is around $30 . Excellent rendering options and quality.
Export from resolve using at higher bitrate settings using DNx or something like that then re render using myffmpeg for delivery.

Myffmpg is very inexpensive GUI for ffmpeg and is around $30 . Excellent rendering options and quality.
Export from resolve using at higher bitrate settings using DNx or something like that then re render using myffmpeg for delivery.

What is DNx? And wouldn't I just need that if I wanted to export the video audio at a higher bitrate (along with my video)?

What is DNx? And wouldn't I just need that if I wanted to export the video audio at a higher bitrate (along with my video)?

DNxHD and DNxHR are high bit rate low compression intermediate codecs that a lot of export out of Resolve. We then run the export through a 3rd part encoder like ffmpeg that gives us more control over our final deliverables.

How much more do you want to pay for a third party decoder/encoder?

Is that an option? Because I probably would pay to get the commercial license for x264 built-in to Resolve.

@jim: x264 project doesn't offer support. BMD can't implement something they can't offer support for I guess.

Sent from my GM 5 Plus d using Tapatalk

Or 192Khz?

If so, that's the maximum sample rate for most in the industry. 48khz is standard for film/video. 44.1khz for CD quality.

No, kbps. Not talking about sample rate, I'm talking about bit rate. The AAC codec for MP4 in Resolve only supports 16-bit from 96 to 192 kbps.

Is that an option? Because I probably would pay to get the commercial license for x264 built-in to Resolve.

Wait... I'm not allowed to use the videos I made that I exported with that codec commercially??? Like I can't make money off of them unless I upgrade the codec???

x264 project doesn't offer support.

Even for the commercial license?

Odd.

I can't make money off of them unless I upgrade the codec???

That's not it. The commercial license for x264 allows companies to incorporate the technology into their software and sell it.

x264 project doesn't offer support.

Even for the commercial license?

Odd.

When are they gonna incorporate h.265 already

AFAIK the H264 encoder/decoder is using the one that's available through the OS itself. If you need something else then render out a master and compress with another software.

What file format would I use for an uncompressed master and what settings would I use for it?

It's not Uncompressed, but I use Cineform AVI files as my Master for processing in MeGUI (an x264 front end).

It would be nice to get rid of that intermediary.

It's not Uncompressed, but I use Cineform AVI files as my Master for processing in MeGUI (an x264 front end).

It would be nice to get rid of that intermediary.

How high does the audio quality go? Is the audio uncompressed?

Also, is HandBrake an okay front-end if I want to compress some video into MP4 format?

What file format would I use for an uncompressed master and what settings would I use for it?

Honestly, Most people don't have enough disk space uncompressed footage unless their master is really really short.

Give DNxHR a try, it has minimal compression.
http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_U ... ifications

Honestly, Most people don't have enough disk space uncompressed footage unless their master is really really short.
http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_U ... ifications

I have only like 30GB on my main SSD left, but I'm only trying to make about a 2 and a half minute video for YouTube.

How high does the audio quality go?

Audio is PCM. I would like to use the 24 bit option, but AVI files are limited to 16 bit, so vote up the following.

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=96953

is HandBrake an okay front-end

I never cared for it. I find MeGUI offers more refined control of x264 parameters.

I would like to use the 24 bit option,

I don't know what your usage case is, but if it's for final delivery, 16 bit is enough. 24 bit is only useful if there is going to be further processing.

I think I have a workaround for Windows 10 platform. If you make a compound clip of your whole timeline, then I go to Fairlight and set the audio track to stereo or 5.1 or whatever, then the Deliver page allows you to alter the audio AAC data rate for H264 videos to whatever you want.

I selected 384kb/s and selected Track Number 1 for the Output Track option

I think I have a workaround for Windows 10 platform. If you make a compound clip of your whole timeline, then I go to Fairlight and set the audio track to stereo or 5.1 or whatever, then the Deliver page allows you to alter the audio AAC data rate for H264 videos to whatever you want.
I selected 384kb/s and selected Track Number 1 for the Output Track option

I just noticed that you can actually set the audio track selection in the render settings from 'Main 1' to eg. 'Timeline Track'. That also unlocks >192 kbps rates in the UI on Windows. I tried a render at 512 though, but the final file (on Studio) is still only 192kbps.

I would really like to see MKV container support, as that's open-source and has wide codec support. eg. YouTube also supports it. For example, my preferred way to archive masters is H264 lossless with FLAC audio. MKV also supports stereoscopic clips, along with metadata to describe them. I work with 3D and have many files in this format.

Wow, I just found this out a few moments ago and did a bunch of tests. That's horrible. It doesn't even sound like 192, it sounds like 128, even though the file info says 181kbps. I'm incredibly disappointed. My hearing isn't nearly as good as it used to be, so when I blatantly hear AAC compression on a video of me just talking, it has to be really bad.

This is worse than the reason why I wanted to stop using Premiere. Unbelievable.

Well, I suppose I could export as a mov file and use "Linear PCM" as the audio codec, and YouTube and BitChute accept it, but LBRY/Odysee does not.

Agreed it's a shame (I do music videos so yeah). .mov is the workaround, but I avoid it due to gamma issues on Windows in the past. Hope the AAC bitrate limit can be lifted, but I assume it's a codec licensing issue?

Does the 17 beta up the limit? (I can get it to launch but it crashes shortly after getting to the timeline).

17 supports third party encoder plug-ins via SDK, so anything is possible. It may even work now with the x264 plugin.
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=125570

17 supports third party encoder plug-ins via SDK, so anything is possible. It may even work now with the x264 plugin.

that's good news.

17 supports third party encoder plug-ins via SDK, so anything is possible. It may even work now with the x264 plugin.
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=125570

Indeed, that IS good news, but it *does* require buying the studio version.

Hi guys,

I just came across this thread whilst searching for the same thing regarding YouTube music video uploads and see the discussion is more or less still active.

A bit of searching came up with the following page:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answ ... on-h-codec

YT upload.jpg (255.44 KiB) Viewed 13803 times

These are guidelines for official monetised music labels with 'ContentID' tracking but they will no doubt use the same encoder across the platform.


If the link/image doesn't work for you, the short of it is:

YT accepts both .mp4 AND .mov (quicktime) formats with a h.264 video codec, natively.

They specifically recommend uploading uncompressed PCM format audio at 24-bit 44.1khz (but 16-bit is fine, as is 48k).
They advise against using AAC compression on your video's audio regardless of the bitrate.

"Although it is not recommended, YouTube accepts compressed audio. YouTube transcodes from the delivered format; audio quality is much better when transcoded from a lossless format compared to re-compressing a lossy audio format."

If you're producing music then your audio masters should be 24-bit WAV files already.

You should therefore export from Resolve using the .MOV (Quicktime) container with h.264 video and PCM audio codecs for uploading to youtube.
Resolve 15 exports with these settings no problem but is limited to 48khz audio sample rate.

I would recommend exporting a 48khz master straight from your DAW for the purpose of creating a video even if the samples you worked with in creating the music are 44.1k, as opposed to letting Resolve resample a 44.1khz exported master. This means all your effects and things applied to those 44.1k samples in Ableton (for example) will be rendered in 48k straight off the bat. It makes a considerable difference in maintaining the 'air' and spacial imaging of a performance which has reverb etc applied to channels in the mix when these effects are already mastered in Resolve's native 48k.

If you're not a producer but creating video on somebody else's bahalf - ask them to render a 24-bit 48k master specifically for the purpose. It's not difficult to do and it makes all the difference.

I hope this helps somebody.

Ben