Review: Sorenson Squeeze 4.5

Windows Media Encoding
We tested Squeeze against Microsoft’s flagship Windows Media Encoder, producing identical 640x480 resolution video files at 500Kbps (468 video/32 audio), encoding on a Dell Precision 390 equipped with a 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo processor. Though the Windows Media Encoder proved slightly faster (7:34 min:sec, compared to 9:42), Squeeze quality was noticeably better, especially in scenes involving significant deinterlacing (Figure 3).

Figure 3 (below): Deinterlacing is a problem with the Windows Media Encoder, but not Squeeze.

Figure 3

As you can also see, the Squeeze output seemed a touch less faded than the Windows Media Encoder-encoded clip, a trend evident in all compressed comparisons in all formats. As shown in Figure 4, Squeeze also handled motion better than the Windows Media Encoder, preserving quality without multiple club artifacts.

Figure 4 (below): Note the multiple clubs and hands on the left.

Figure 4

On the downside, Squeeze showed slightly more aliasing than did Windows Media Encoder, and the differences between the two encoders in low-motion clips was very modest, with Squeeze’s crisper colors the primary distinction. So if you’re producing low-motion talking-head clips with the Windows Media Encoder, you might consider boosting color saturation in your editor before encoding to minimize the comparative differences. If you’re producing big-screen Windows Media clips, you should notice a significant quality improvement with Squeeeze.

Flash Encoding
For two-pass variable bit rate encoding to the VP6 Flash format, it’s a two-horse race between Squeeze and On2’s Flix Pro 8.5, and a tough race to call at that. Squeeze is faster and has a much broader feature set, though Flix Pro has more Flash-oriented features, like the ability to apply a chromakey effect and create Mac, Windows, and Linux playback projectors. However, Flix Pro’s batch encoding feature can encode multiple files to one template, but not one file to multiple encoding parameters, a feature many publishers can’t live without. Flix also can’t match Squeeze’s command-line and Watch folder automation.

Of course, for many producers, quality is the most important buying criterion, and here’s where it gets really close. Again, Squeeze’s clips seem a bit more highly saturated and vivid, which really helps in many scenes. Even producers happy with Flix should download and try Squeeze, just to see how adding a bit of color saturation in their editors might improve overall appearance. Squeeze also seemed to preserve fine detail better than Flix Pro, though occasionally produced more visible aliasing.

Streaming Covers
Free
for qualified subscribers
Subscribe Now Current Issue Past Issues
Related Articles

Sorenson Squeeze 7: The Good, The Bad, and the Lovely

The latest iteration of Sorenson Squeeze isn't perfect, but it's still the best desktop transcoding tool on the market.