Downsides to multiplexing audio for H.264 Blu-ray disc?

Question

I have a 9 minute video; personal/consumer use; 1280x720; 59.94; source video from a Contour+ helmet camera that stores .mov, H.264; audio is on a separate track from my own selection of mp3 files (it is a music video).   I have three intended playback targets: Blu-ray disc, Sony PS3 native, and PC/Windows Media Player.   Is there a big downside on video or audio quality in this case using multiplexing to produce a single .m2t file imported into Encore to produce the BD vs. separate .m4v/.wav files?   Not a huge deal, but having to maintain one production files vs. three is a minor plus if it makes little to no difference on the BD front.
Depending on the answer, If I use the H.264 Blu-ray format/preset in PP to produce the .m2t file does Encore have to re-encode?   I am assuming Encore does not reencode if I am using separate .m4v/.wav files.
Thanks

Answer 1

You must always remember gents, when you multiplex, there is a BUFFER attached to that (computer term that means a chunk of size and bit defined fast memory space that holds an intermediate piece of data for shuttling to the next piece of hardware).  This changes the MAX Bitrate allowed for your video (but it doesn't show in AME cs6 and I don't think it shows in lower versions; not sure about cc).  Since you are tying one stream to another, and effectively weaving the data into one stream, you are maxing out the amount of data you can pass in that stream.  Only certain types of data can be read in this manner.  Think of it this way, you have taken two sets of data with different bit widths, and different bit-sample rates, and tied them together into one stream.  This stream still has to fit in the max data rates of the medium.  Your video cannot exceed 30mb\s and you are also left with another problem.  Audio, without mux, has so many different formats and bit fiddling profiles that it would be difficult to make sure it was within the sizing for data.  If, however, you limit it to one major codec, and use predefined bit\sample rates that can be sized up, you'll be able to tell if all the settings are "legal" or not, as you then have a predefined data-size for both audio and video.  If you don't multiplex, you get 2 streams.  It takes longer to load the disc, but both streams are cached.  Typically, with more motion, I like to non-plex, but with more emphasis on audio, I start leaning toward a TS file.  IF you want forward compatibility, select an intermediate codec, with little to no compression, save to a disc image, then burn a disc and file it away.  Every 10-15 years, hire an intern to turn their hair white recoding all your video and following the same procedure (unpaid internship time), but make them happy by hiring them as "Labor" on a short job or two and pay them well for standing around or stroking the egos of the "Talent".  What can I say, we all work more diligently and creatively when we feel more connected with it, whether we're brooding and trying to communicate the angst of a lost generation, or felling powerful enough to choreograph leaping tall buildings in a single bound.  Misery loves company, and powerful loves to be reminded it is by everybody whether it is or isn't.
If you need better clarification...
Lets go back to dvd for a moment.  DVD structure is Video TS and Audio TS.  TS is Transport Stream.  A stream is a BUFFERED movement of data that is transferred quickly in set sized chunks.  In DVD there were two transport streams to play back early on.  Later, many started muxing those streams and encrypting them, so that upon Decrypting they could be played.  Muxing made the encryption easier, as only one stream needed to be encrypted and it was all in the Video TS.  Audio TS folders are still written, but there is little data there.  In fact, removing this folder when no data is actually present has shown in some cases to do no damage, while in others, it will not play.  This is because, it is used as a shell to copy.  It initiates the audio stream playback on older players, and on newer players it isn't necessary.
Blu-ray yields similar limitations.  You need to match the size of the buffer you are feeding.  Most players max out around 35mps from the old sets, and newer players actually pull more like 50mps.  If you don't know your target, you'll be out of luck.  I've seen blu-rays that don't play on older players being sold at video stores, at Frys, everywhere.  I've played them on an old one and found them to be unplayable.  Newer formats do not work with older players, but, they note it on the package that you need to meet certain specs, and those specs can usually be found on a sticker on your device so you can see if they match.  Remember your Target BitRate and Max Bitrate.  The Target should be less than the max for the device you aim for.  CS6 won't usually allow anything over 32.7mps, anyway, so setting this in AME even with dynamic linking could cause problems.  However, you do have the choice to locate a transcode... ...presents an interesting possibility.  I've been trying to get a project done or I'd try this myself:
I'd use the x264 free codec, with some basic options and blu-ray-compatible flag, with --fake-interlaced, to create a transcode and link it into encore.  However, encore hasn't liked any of my transcodes that use multiple passes.  I'm going to try with a single pass later, and produce an intermediate output for now.