When are the 2007 Sony SXRD TV's coming out? [Text View] - Page 2

BuTal63

03-29-07, 02:25 PM

I'm no expert on this, but I get the feeling the KS-xxR200A series is a sort of hybrid mix - not quite XBR2 quality, combining some features of the XBR2's with the lower tier KDS-xxA2000 series.

A couple of points that jumped out at me: the R200A's have only a 120 watt lamp; the XBR2's have a 180 watt lamp. While no one I'm aware of ever complained that the SXRD's with 120 watt lamps weren't bright enough, this difference may indicate further differences in the optical blocks between the XBR2's and the R200's (again no expert here). Speaking of lamps, I could find no indication of a spare lamp being provided with the R200A's, while the XBR2's are shipped with a spare 180 watt lamp.

Also, the R200A's have one RF input, while the XBR2's have two - one for cable/satellite and a separate one for antenna in.

Also, the XBR2's specs indicate WEGA Engine HD™ with DRC-MFv2.5 digital video processing, while the R200A says Bravia Engine, with the same DRC-MF2.5 dvp. Don't know if this is a substantive difference or if it's just different terminology for different markets.

There are probably other differences, but was too lazy to read the R200A specs in greater detail. You should easily be able to make the comparison yourself on line.

Bottom line: Sony does not lie - they apparently are not the Indian market equivalent of the XBR2 series.

_Dan_

03-30-07, 04:51 PM

The KS-70R200A does show that it uses a 180 watt projection lamp. A spare projection lamp is not listed in the accessories.

bfdtv

03-30-07, 05:20 PM

Bottom line: Sony does not lie - they apparently are not the Indian market equivalent of the XBR2 series.Some representatives don't know what they are talking about.

It is clear that the R200A shares more in common with the XBR2 than it does the A2000 and A2020 series, with the same processing, same lamp, and same speakers.

BuTal63

03-31-07, 04:46 PM

The KS-70R200A does show that it uses a 180 watt projection lamp. A spare projection lamp is not listed in the accessories.

Thanks for the correction. I did not read closely enough. The 50" and 60" sets have the 120 Watt lamp, while the 70" set does indeed have a 180 Watt lamp. Not used to seeing two different lamps in the same Sony series.

http://www.sony.com.ph/sxrd/SXRD.pdf

Foxhounder

03-31-07, 06:02 PM

bfdtv

03-31-07, 06:43 PM

When will the new line (KS-xxR200A) come to the USA? Around summer/autumn? And will it have 2 HDMI inputs? How about HDMI 1.3? And are they pretty much merging the Bravia and SXRD sets for an "ultimate hybrid"?I've confirmed with Sony that the R200A is simply a variant of the XBR2 for overseas markets. It's never coming to the U.S. market.

The next models for the USA are the A3000 and XBR3.

And are they pretty much merging the Bravia and SXRD sets for an "ultimate hybrid"?Bravia is just a marketing name. It has nothing to do with technology.

Andyisc00l

03-31-07, 07:10 PM

I've confirmed with Sony that the R200A is simply a variant of the XBR2 for overseas markets. It's never coming to the U.S. market.

The next models for the USA are the A3000 and XBR3.

Bravia is just a marketing name. It has nothing to do with technology.

wooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwww

how is there stillllll no info gosh I hate life its april now

Foxhounder

03-31-07, 07:13 PM

...is there going to be a 50'' XBR version? Or is it still going to be 60''+?

bfdtv

03-31-07, 07:28 PM

...is there going to be a 50'' XBR version? Or is it still going to be 60''+?Just 60" and larger.

Foxhounder

03-31-07, 07:53 PM

6SpeedTA95

03-31-07, 08:50 PM

Whats the big deal with the A3000's as opposed to the 2020's or does anyone even know? When are the A3000's due out?

bfdtv

03-31-07, 09:13 PM

Finally... is the A3000 series going to be "overshadowed" by the "premium" XBR series? Like the A2000's are now?

Do you know if the A3000's will support DRC MF 2.5 or higher? How about the newer version of HDMI? Or will it be just like I said, overshadowed by newer tech. from the XBR's?Whats the big deal with the A3000's as opposed to the 2020's or does anyone even know? When are the A3000's due out?
Sony hasn't released specifications on those models coming in ~July. With those models still 3-4 months away, the specifications may not even be final yet.

Look for more information in June.

6SpeedTA95

03-31-07, 10:03 PM

Zero/One

03-31-07, 10:53 PM

Sony hasn't released specifications on those models coming in ~July. With those models still 3-4 months away, the specifications may not even be final yet.

Look for more information in June.
They have working models of all the stuff coming out later this year. I'm sure plenty of Sony employees have seen what coming out. That is why I'm starting to get enthusiastic about this TV. With press releases just 9 weeks away now. I would just like to know if they have all the stuff I have been looking for in an HDTV.

HDTV Wish list.
1. New black case design.
2. New and improved SXRD chips with increased contrast.
3. 120Hz frame rate conversion.
4. Slim design and Less depth.
5. 4 HDMI 1.3s.
6. HD Twin view POP.
7. New "playstation" GUI menu.
8. Longer blub life or one can only wish this year a laser light engine.

nharmon91

03-31-07, 11:21 PM

5. 4 HDMI 1.3s.

Woah now.

Andyisc00l

04-01-07, 01:49 AM

They have working models of all the stuff coming out later this year. I'm sure plenty of Sony employees have seen what coming out. That is why I'm starting to get enthusiastic about this TV. With press releases just 9 weeks away now. I would just like to know if they have all the stuff I have been looking for in an HDTV.

HDTV Wish list.
1. New black case design.
2. New and improved SXRD chips with increased contrast.
3. 120Hz frame rate conversion.
4. Slim design and Less depth.
5. 4 HDMI 1.3s.
6. HD Twin view POP.
7. New "playstation" GUI menu.
8. Longer blub life or one can only wish this year a laser light engine.

does anyone else here think that bulb lifes are fine? every 3-4 years you have to buy a $200 bulb? figure that in to your final cost when you buy a TV..first 8 years of owning a TV only paying $200? not much of a price to pay

kelpie

04-01-07, 08:16 AM

does anyone else here think that bulb lifes are fine? every 3-4 years you have to buy a $200 bulb? figure that in to your final cost when you buy a TV..first 8 years of owning a TV only paying $200? not much of a price to pay

I've seen you fuss at people about their math skills, so please bear with me. ;) Keep in mind that not everyone uses displays the same way, and you seem to have made some assumptions based on your use (and display choice) that might not fit someone else. The recommended replacement interval for the lamp on the XBR2 SXRD's is 4000 hours- not "3-4 years". If someone were to keep their display on 24/7 (and I'm sure some people do) that's 167 days of use on average before replacing the lamp- or ~2 lamp replacements per year. If someone uses their display 12 hours per day, that's about 1 lamp/year. At 8 hours of use per day, that XBR2 lamp can be expected to last about 1 year, 4 months. To get your 4 years out of an XBR2's lamp, the owner would be limited to watching their display ~2hrs 45min/ day on average. I'm sure that many people do watch that much TV per day, and a few will likely get more than 4 years out of a lamp, but not everyone.

Let's look at that differently. You have estimated a cost of $200 for the replacement bulbs. Maybe you could share your source with us, because the replacement cost on the XBR2's lamps looks more like $300 to me- half again your estimate. Yeah, you get one replacement bulb included with the XBR2's, but at $300 per lamp, that 24/7 user is looking at $1500-2100 in lamp costs over the 3-4 year interval you specified (or $600/year, less the one "free" lamp), the 12 hour/day user is looking at $600-900 in lamp replacement costs over 3-4 years, and the 8 hour/day user should plan on spending $300-600 on lamps over 3-4 years. A 24/7 user could spend $4500 on lamps over your 8 year time frame if the lamps last as expected.

You're right, a buyer should figure lamp replacement cost into the purchase price of one of these displays, but they need to be careful to figure in their cost based on their use, not yours. Frankly, I'm with Zero/One and would like to see longer lamp lives (or lower replacement cost).

dominica

04-01-07, 09:08 AM

does anyone else here think that bulb lifes are fine? every 3-4 years you have to buy a $200 bulb? figure that in to your final cost when you buy a TV..first 8 years of owning a TV only paying $200? not much of a price to pay

I little off the subject but:

One of the best things to do with the RPTV is to get a warranty that covers (repair, replacement, and bulbs). I paid $400 with PC Richard in NY that covers the bulbs and everything for 5 years, plus I have the spare bulb that comes with the XBR2. That’s one less thing to worry for the next 5 years.

kelpie

04-01-07, 09:28 AM

I little off the subject but:

One of the best things to do with the RPTV is to get a warranty that covers (repair, replacement, and bulbs). I paid $400 with PC Richard in NY that covers the bulbs and everything for 5 years, plus I have the spare bulb that comes with the XBR2. That’s one less thing to worry for the next 5 years.

Sounds like a deal, dominica. The 5 year warranty normally costs $500 at PC Richard. The warranty is available in New York and New Jersey only according to PC Richard's website- did they say what happens if an owner moves? The warranty also excludes "consumable items", and I'd bet that some warranty providers would consider lamps "consumable" and might use that language to deny coverage for lamps. Did you get the lamp coverage specifically in writing? How did they word it?

Thanks

hubbabubba

04-01-07, 09:51 AM

dominica

04-01-07, 04:33 PM

to be honest, i recall pc richards not covering bulbs which was a reason why I didn't go with them when I bough my set. I could be wrong, but I remember speaking to a salesperson who thankfully was "honest" about it.

PC Richards does cover bulbs, plus I got the manager to put it in writing for me. I have a family member that works there also, who double checked for me. The 5 years is usually 500, I got it cheaper because we bought a couple of things the same time we picked up the TV. Also, two co-workers got TV’s there later and called twice to check on the warranty with the repair dept and they said it is under warranty. They only cover the NY State area for the warranty, that’s the only thing that sucks

dominica

04-01-07, 05:25 PM

Sounds like a deal, dominica. The 5 year warranty normally costs $500 at PC Richard. The warranty is available in New York and New Jersey only according to PC Richard's website- did they say what happens if an owner moves? The warranty also excludes "consumable items", and I'd bet that some warranty providers would consider lamps "consumable" and might use that language to deny coverage for lamps. Did you get the lamp coverage specifically in writing? How did they word it?

Thanks

Give them a call on Mon to Fri (877) PCR-1909. They gave me a warranty paper, it said it covered all parts etc, but it was not very descriptive, so I ask the manager about it and he also signed it, and I called before the delivered the TV and asked again, and then months after I had also, and my co-workers did the same. Plus family member checked for me also. The warranty is expansive, range from 299-499, but it covers everything, bulbs, plus if they can’t repair it etc; you get a new one or equal value

Be Good

Andyisc00l

04-01-07, 06:08 PM

I've seen you fuss at people about their math skills, so please bear with me. ;) Keep in mind that not everyone uses displays the same way, and you seem to have made some assumptions based on your use (and display choice) that might not fit someone else. The recommended replacement interval for the lamp on the XBR2 SXRD's is 4000 hours- not "3-4 years". If someone were to keep their display on 24/7 (and I'm sure some people do) that's 167 days of use on average before replacing the lamp- or ~2 lamp replacements per year. If someone uses their display 12 hours per day, that's about 1 lamp/year. At 8 hours of use per day, that XBR2 lamp can be expected to last about 1 year, 4 months. To get your 4 years out of an XBR2's lamp, the owner would be limited to watching their display ~2hrs 45min/ day on average. I'm sure that many people do watch that much TV per day, and a few will likely get more than 4 years out of a lamp, but not everyone.

Let's look at that differently. You have estimated a cost of $200 for the replacement bulbs. Maybe you could share your source with us, because the replacement cost on the XBR2's lamps looks more like $300 to me- half again your estimate. Yeah, you get one replacement bulb included with the XBR2's, but at $300 per lamp, that 24/7 user is looking at $1500-2100 in lamp costs over the 3-4 year interval you specified (or $600/year, less the one "free" lamp), the 12 hour/day user is looking at $600-900 in lamp replacement costs over 3-4 years, and the 8 hour/day user should plan on spending $300-600 on lamps over 3-4 years. A 24/7 user could spend $4500 on lamps over your 8 year time frame if the lamps last as expected.

You're right, a buyer should figure lamp replacement cost into the purchase price of one of these displays, but they need to be careful to figure in their cost based on their use, not yours. Frankly, I'm with Zero/One and would like to see longer lamp lives (or lower replacement cost).

that is pretty sad that you took that much time in to this lol. Lamps can be bought for $200 if you want a link I can send you. Most people will have their lamp last 3+ years, period. How many people still have their original XBR1 bulb? do a poll.

kelpie

04-01-07, 06:35 PM

that is pretty sad that you took that much time in to this lol. Lamps can be bought for $200 if you want a link I can send you. Most people will have their lamp last 3+ years, period. How many people still have their original XBR1 bulb? do a poll.

Thanks Andy. Yes, I would indeed like that link please. It's good to know that people can rely on your extensive experience and expertise with the SXRD's and don't have to think for themselves or consider their own needs or usage patterns when considering their purchase, period. Good ole Andy. Whatever would we do without you to guide us? LOL

By the way Andy, correct me if I'm wrong but if I'm not mistaken, the XBR1 SXRD's were first released about 9/15/05. Wouldn't that make the oldest XBR1 SXRD just a little over 18 months old? I'm no math whiz (I think that you called one poster a "stupid head" for bad math), but isn't 18 months only half of 3+ years? I'd take that poll of XBR1 users, but I'd be afraid that 0.0% might say that their lamp had lasted for the 3+ years that you claim.

Andyisc00l

04-01-07, 11:42 PM

Thanks Andy. Yes, I would indeed like that link please. It's good to know that people can rely on your extensive experience and expertise with the SXRD's and don't have to think for themselves or consider their own needs or usage patterns when considering their purchase, period. Good ole Andy. Whatever would we do without you to guide us? LOL

By the way Andy, correct me if I'm wrong but if I'm not mistaken, the XBR1 SXRD's were first released about 9/15/05. Wouldn't that make the oldest XBR1 SXRD just a little over 18 months old? I'm no math whiz (I think that you called one poster a "stupid head" for bad math), but isn't 18 months only half of 3+ years? I'd take that poll of XBR1 users, but I'd be afraid that 0.0% might say that their lamp had lasted for the 3+ years that you claim.

are you the idiot that said 60" tvs were 17% bigger then 50" tvs? if so you are stupid head. I think I was being sarcastic.

ebay item # 150056114976...authorized seller :-)

you've got way to much time on your hands...
if you think all of the people that bought xbr1s are going to be replacing their lamp every 2 years your an idiot. That would be a riteous pain. And if I'm not mistaken 4,000 is an underestimate. Sure some people might have to replace their lamp every 2 years, but that is a very small amount. Not many people leave their tvs on 8 hours a day, every day. Maybe 8 hours a day every once in a while, but very small amount of people will watch 8 hours of TV a day 365 days a year. You are an idiot. I'm not posting anymore because this is that stupid.

A bunch of what ifs and or buts...I watch alot of TV and I'd say when I watch alot of TV in a day its on for like 5 hours. Most days I don't watch it that much, but still, if I watch 5 hours of TV a day that should last 2-3+ years because 4,000 is an underestimate. So I guess in my case, I don't have to worry about bulb life. And I'm sure many people would agree.

If your leaving your TV on for 8+ hours a day, then buy another TV if the bulb is a pain, but for most of us, it isn't an issue.

kelpie

04-02-07, 12:53 AM

are you the idiot that said 60" tvs were 17% bigger then 50" tvs? if so you are stupid head. I think I was being sarcastic.

No, that was Dead.Horse that you called a "stupid head". Of course anyone can make a mistake- and being somewhat of a math-o-phobe myself I can sure understand a simple math error like Dead.Horse made. But then it would take a really blithering idiot to continue to insist he was right even when it had clearly been demonstrated that he was wrong, wouldn't it? I'm glad that Dead.Horse didn't make that mistake. You would have really gone-off on him then, wouldn't you? :eek:

ebay item # ...authorized seller :-).

Hey, that's great Andy! You found one eBay seller that has 6 lamps to sell for $226.98 shipped. That's only a little bit more than the $200 that you claimed, isn't it? I'm not sure what you mean by "authorized seller" though - I don't see where the seller makes any claim about being "authorized". They do have an "all sales final, no returns" policy too I see (except for one DOA). Not everyone would be as comfortable dealing with an eBay seller as you, but they do have a good seller rating though and seem dependable, so I'll give you that one. So giving you the benefit of the doubt, that rare but possible 24/7 XBR2 SXRD watcher that I mentioned will only be out ~$3000 for lamps over your 8 year time frame, wouldn't they? Oops, but you said $200 over 8 years, didn't you? Ouch. That particular display owner might not agree with you that lamp replacement cost is inconsequential.

you've got way to much time on your hands....

How I choose to spend my time is my concern. I'm sure that you do think that it's "sad" that I spend the time to consider situations other than my own before I start spouting opinions and advice to others, but frankly I find it sad that you don't. But hey, I guess that's just your style, eh? LOL

if you think all of the people that bought xbr1s are going to be replacing their lamp every 2 years your an idiot. That would be a riteous pain. And if I'm not mistaken 4,000 is an underestimate.

Now I never said that I thought that "all of the people that bought xbr1s are going to replace their lamp every 2 years". If you had taken the trouble to read my post, you would know that. What I did say was that the XBR2's lamp life is expected to be 4000 hours. From the XBR2's manual (pg. 66), "To maintain the quality of your viewing experience, Sony recommends that you replace the lamp after approximately 4,000 hours of use." I can't see how you could possibly be mistaken even in light of that bit of information since you have shown such a tremendous amount of insider knowledge in the workings of the Sony Corporation in this thread. I'm sure that you know far more about this than Sony. (Hey Andy, that's sarcasm. What you did to Dead.Horse was just being insulting.)

Sure some people might have to replace their lamp every 2 years, but that is a very small amount. Not many people leave their tvs on 8 hours a day, every day. Maybe 8 hours a day every once in a while, but very small amount of people will watch 8 hours of TV a day 365 days a year. You are an idiot. .

There you go projecting your own personal patterns onto everyone else again. A Nielson survey (http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003154980) showed that the average family in the US watches 8hrs 14min of TV a day (2005-2006). OK, that's the whole family and maybe they're watching more than one display. But the same study shows that the average individual in the US watches 4hrs 36min of TV per day. That viewing is likely on the family's "main" display like the XBR2 and does not include the 7.5 hours per week of gaming that the average gamer enjoys. Do you remember how your figures assumed 2hrs 45min of TV per day? As I said, some people may very well follow your expected pattern, but it is not the norm. I do not believe that you have demonstrated that I am an idiot on this point.

I'm not posting anymore because this is that stupid.

That is probably a very wise choice. I think the stupidity in this thread would decrease markedly if you follow your instincts on this one.

See ya,

kelpie

Andyisc00l

04-02-07, 01:40 AM

No, that was Dead.Horse that you called a "stupid head". Of course anyone can make a mistake- and being somewhat of a math-o-phobe myself I can sure understand a simple math error like Dead.Horse made. But then it would take a really blithering idiot to continue to insist he was right even when it had clearly been demonstrated that he was wrong, wouldn't it? I'm glad that Dead.Horse didn't make that mistake. You would have really gone-off on him then, wouldn't you? :eek:

Hey, that's great Andy! You found one eBay seller that has 6 lamps to sell for $226.98 shipped. That's only a little bit more than the $200 that you claimed, isn't it? I'm not sure what you mean by "authorized seller" though - I don't see where the seller makes any claim about being "authorized". They do have an "all sales final, no returns" policy too I see (except for one DOA). Not everyone would be as comfortable dealing with an eBay seller as you, but they do have a good seller rating though and seem dependable, so I'll give you that one. So giving you the benefit of the doubt, that rare but possible 24/7 XBR2 SXRD watcher that I mentioned will only be out ~$3000 for lamps over your 8 year time frame, wouldn't they? Oops, but you said $200 over 8 years, didn't you? Ouch. That particular display owner might not agree with you that lamp replacement cost is inconsequential.

How I choose to spend my time is my concern. I'm sure that you do think that it's "sad" that I spend the time to consider situations other than my own before I start spouting opinions and advice to others, but frankly I find it sad that you don't. But hey, I guess that's just your style, eh? LOL

Now I never said that I thought that "all of the people that bought xbr1s are going to replace their lamp every 2 years". If you had taken the trouble to read my post, you would know that. What I did say was that the XBR2's lamp life is expected to be 4000 hours. From the XBR2's manual (pg. 66), "To maintain the quality of your viewing experience, Sony recommends that you replace the lamp after approximately 4,000 hours of use." I can't see how you could possibly be mistaken even in light of that bit of information since you have shown such a tremendous amount of insider knowledge in the workings of the Sony Corporation in this thread. I'm sure that you know far more about this than Sony. (Hey Andy, that's sarcasm. What you did to Dead.Horse was just being insulting.)

There you go projecting your own personal patterns onto everyone else again. A Nielson survey (http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003154980) showed that the average family in the US watches 8hrs 14min of TV a day (2005-2006). OK, that's the whole family and maybe they're watching more than one display. But the same study shows that the average individual in the US watches 4hrs 36min of TV per day. That viewing is likely on the family's "main" display like the XBR2 and does not include the 7.5 hours per week of gaming that the average gamer enjoys. Do you remember how your figures assumed 2hrs 45min of TV per day? As I said, some people may very well follow your expected pattern, but it is not the norm. I do not believe that you have demonstrated that I am an idiot on this point.

That is probably a very wise choice. I think the stupidity in this thread would decrease markedly if you follow your instincts on this one.

See ya,

kelpie

I didn't even read it. Later.

kelpie

04-02-07, 01:52 AM

I didn't even read it. Later.

Why am I not surprised? Did you put your fingers in your ears and say "La, la, la, la, la" too? LOL! :D

sandman9601

04-02-07, 09:57 PM

are you the idiot that said 60" tvs were 17% bigger then 50" tvs? if so you are stupid head. I think I was being sarcastic.

So he's mathematically challenged and you're grammatically challenged. Not much difference, really. Well, except for the fact that he can at least communicate with others...

JData

04-02-07, 11:11 PM

Freeheeldude

04-02-07, 11:25 PM

kelpie

04-02-07, 11:42 PM

I have been following this thread in great anticipation for the 2007 SXRD models but what are you guys are telling me that the bulb doesn't have a long life - that worries me. If that's the case, I'll keep my current RPTV.

Hey JData:

Kinda depends on your definition of "long", I guess. The 2006 A2000/2020 SXRD's 120w lamps have an estimated bulb life of 8000 hours (that's almost a year of 24/7 viewing and ~3 years of watching 8 hours/day), but the XBR2 SXRD's 180w lamps recommend replacement at 4,000 hours. A viewer who uses their display less frequently (or one with deep pockets) would likely find those lifespans just fine. We don't know yet what the lamps in the 2007 SXRD's will be like. Some of us can wish for longer lamp life in the upcoming 2007 SXRD's.

I would probably be considered a moderately heavy user, but while a 4,000 hour lamp life might be a disappointment, it wouldn't be a total deal-breaker for me. For someone else, lamp replacement cost with one of these sets (in both money and potential down-time) might be prohibitive. That's why I think it important that display owners take their own viewing habits into account when they're figuring their costs.

HTH,

kelpie

Dead.Horse

04-03-07, 11:29 AM

WEll, I haven't read the thread, but just got a KDS-50A2020 today. Superb blacks, awesome saturation without bleed, lots of inputs, haven't put up any test patterns, but off-air 1080 HD (CBS viewing The Black Donnellys) looks just perfect. Smack on. Would like to know why the manual says not to use HDMI for computer input. Going to plug it into my Mac anyway....

The manual always says that, even if it works fine. My Toshiba 57HX83 said the same thing regarding the DVI port, but I was able to connect to my htpc with no issues, and it looked great. Why they still try to prevent you from connecting a PC to a DVI/HDMI port, I don't know, other than possible copyright circumvension issues (It's possible to connect your htpc to a STB via firewire to record protected HD cable content)

EliteLuvR

04-03-07, 05:58 PM

JData

04-04-07, 10:51 AM

strutter

04-04-07, 12:20 PM

i understand your concern. it is actually not a subject that i have given much thought. 1-2000 $ is alot of money to me. :eek: mines on alot but not quite as much as you state yours is. my boy really likes the sleep timer and often falls asleep with it on the floor. i'm already an owner so i dont have the option of deciding not to purchase but if i did have the option right now i believe i would still buy it. i like it that much.
as far as a bulb going out at at a really bad time. my plan is to have a spare handy at all times. XBR2 comes with one. when i'm using that one i will order another one and have it waiting. the boys will just have to wait a few min. while i change it.
it sounds bad but i cant wait until we start seeing post about having to change a bulb. at least we'll have real life longevity numbers.

i'd like to hear the DRA syndrome story :)

mr. wally

04-05-07, 04:17 PM

Kelpie,

Thanks for the reply. I usually have my set turned on once I wake up and she doesn't turn off unless there is a power outage, going to sleep, doing touch up calibrations or cleaning behind the set. So yes, the life of the bulb worries me.

EliteLuvR,

Just because I get a discount doesn't mean I'll end up purchasing it. This bulb life is a concern. I want to enjoy the set w/o having to worry about the bulb replacements at all. Imagine you and the boys coming over to watch the race or something and bulb dies on that day - "DRA syndrome" (inside joke with him, I could share with you all if you are guys are interested because its hilarious) yet it has been nearly a year of ownership. That would royally tick me off.

So in that scenario, you estimated $200-400 per year dedicated to the lamp if I use the set in the way I do my current on. In a span of five years, I am looking at $1000-2000 over the cost of the set. It is like saying the cost of this type of set is what one does annually for preventative maintenance with your vehicle.

IF the lamp has a longer life, the more the merrier I say!

i think you're overestimating the cost of replacement bulbs and underestimating the bulb lifespan.

sony estimates 4000 hrs for xbr2 bulb which may be conservative. if your set is on 24/7 i would think your bulb would last longer since the bulb is not being cycled at all by turning your set on and off. so your 2 free bulbs will probably last you 1 1/2 - 2 years. my guess is you can get 5 years of 24/7 viewing by purchasing about 3 extra bulbs. not really that expensive or unreasonable in view of your set being on constantly for 5 years.

don't forget some owners have had their sets for nearly 6 months now and there have been no reports of bulbs burning out yet.

Zero/One

04-05-07, 07:45 PM

I would prefer a bulb based TV at this point. LEDs are to new and only last 20000 hours at this point and they are not user replaceable. I am one who only watches TV in the evenings and the weekends. I would say I would only use approximately 4 hours at a time. So, 4 X 365 is 1460 hours a year. A bulb would last me three years and with a spare another three. Six Years on an original purchase is not bad to me. I was just saying in my previous post that it would be nice to see bulbs have longer hours. My TV wish list has these things in the order of importance to me. I think everyone should agree that if you watch TV a lot or a little a longer bulb life is most ideal.

1. New black case design.
2. New and improved SXRD chips with increased contrast.
3. 120Hz frame rate conversion.
4. Slim design and less depth.
5. 4 HDMI 1.3s.
6. HD Twin view POP.
7. New "playstation" GUI menu.
8. Longer bulb life or one can only wish this year a laser light engine.

mikeyf

04-05-07, 09:13 PM

Your wish list is going to be a reality. I can't believe how narrow the 60" and 70" XBR3's are going to be....13" and 14" deep.
That's impressive.

karan_sfi

04-06-07, 02:13 AM

Hi, finally got a call from Sony. They say that the KS-70R200A uses a 180watt lamp, and a Bravia engine instead of the Wega engine being used in theXBR2. According to them the Bravia Engine is a newer technology than the Wega Engine

Andyisc00l

04-06-07, 05:13 AM

Your wish list is going to be a reality. I can't believe how narrow the 60" and 70" XBR3's are going to be....13" and 14" deep.
That's impressive.

what? where did you get that info? About 26" right now for the 70"..that is quite a shrink.

i think you're overestimating the cost of replacement bulbs and underestimating the bulb lifespan.

sony estimates 4000 hrs for xbr2 bulb which may be conservative. if your set is on 24/7 i would think your bulb would last longer since the bulb is not being cycled at all by turning your set on and off. so your 2 free bulbs will probably last you 1 1/2 - 2 years. my guess is you can get 5 years of 24/7 viewing by purchasing about 3 extra bulbs. not really that expensive or unreasonable in view of your set being on constantly for 5 years.

don't forget some owners have had their sets for nearly 6 months now and there have been no reports of bulbs burning out yet.

Should be interesting, a new poll for xbr1 owners and bulbs.

Some of them are having around 10,000 hours on 1 bulb.

strutter

04-06-07, 11:42 AM

sony estimates 4000 hrs for xbr2 bulb which may be conservative. .

actually Sony recommends changing it at approximately 4000 hrs. weather it has gone completely out or not. directly from the manual page 66.

to maintain the quality of your viewing experience, Sony recommends that you replace the lamp (1)after approximately 4,000 hours of use (2)when the screen becomes dark or the color looks unusual (3)when the lamp LED blinks or (4)when lamp replacement appears on the screen.

i read this to mean which ever one comes 1st. similar to changing the oil in a car at 3 months or 3000 miles.

i agree though that if one ignores #1 and doesn't change the lamp, one could get more hours out of it.

i just wonder if the screen gets dark all at once or if it is gradual like a florescent bulb. it could happen so gradual that one wouldn't notice the dimming until the fresh bulb is put in. then you'd have that WOW experience.

Zero/One

04-06-07, 06:18 PM

i just wonder if the screen gets dark all at once or if it is gradual like a florescent bulb. it could happen so gradual that one wouldn't notice the dimming until the fresh bulb is put in. then you'd have that WOW experience.

My understanding is that the bulb gradually begins to dim from the time you first turn it on. I don't think you would ever notice it dim yourself until you put in the new bulb.

Hanzo

04-06-07, 10:56 PM

got this from www.engadgethd.com

____________________________
The magic behind Sony's SXRD line is getting an update. Currently, the three sensors that drives the whole picture was developed way back in '05 - eons ago in gadget years - but Sony has the next gen ready to go. Nah, they didn't increase the resolution past 1920x1080 but the biggest improvement in our eyes is the adoption of 120Hz. This is the latest craze in HDTVs as it helps smooth out the picture, creating a very film like response. This new speed is twice as fast as the previous generation so users should see the difference on almost every moving image with less smearing. Sony has plans to stuff these new chips into their latest HDTVs and projectors so there is yet another reason to hold off purchasing an HDTV till you can see these. Sorry 'bout that.
_____________________________

So it's pretty much confirmed that the new SXRD's will have this new chip with the 120Hz technology. I am so glad I held off on purchasing the XBR2's. I can't wait for the new SXRD's to come out...... :D

Zero/One

04-07-07, 12:08 PM

So it's pretty much confirmed that the new SXRD's will have this new chip with the 120Hz technology. I am so glad I held off on purchasing the XBR2's. I can't wait for the new SXRD's to come out...... :D

While 120Hz is nice to see, I was hoping for a newer chip with an increased contrast ratio. Since I have been waiting since the XBR1s came out, I can say with confidence that if this TV has all the features I want, this is the TV I have been waiting for.

tonydeluce

04-07-07, 01:20 PM

While 120Hz is nice to see, I was hoping for a newer chip with an increased contrast ratio. Since I have been waiting since the XBR1s came out, I can say with confidence that if this TV has all the features I want, this is the TV I have been waiting for.

I believe the SXRD chip is going to have to have a major increase in native
contrast to compete with the new JVC chip - do we know for sure that it
won't?

MattFoley

04-07-07, 01:26 PM

got this from www.engadgethd.com

____________________________
The magic behind Sony's SXRD line is getting an update. . . Sony has plans to stuff these new chips into their latest HDTVs and projectors so there is yet another reason to hold off purchasing an HDTV till you can see these. _____________________________

So it's pretty much confirmed that the new SXRD's will have this new chip with the 120Hz technology. I am so glad I held off on purchasing the XBR2's. I can't wait for the new SXRD's to come out...... :D

Has Sony sent an official release on this? When should we hear the details on these new sets? Does anyone know if the 120Hz technology will be included in the upcoming A3000 line or will it be restricted to the XBR3?

Zero/One

04-07-07, 01:35 PM

I believe the SXRD chip is going to have to have a major increase in native
contrast to compete with the new JVC chip - do we know for sure that it
won't?

The Sony Japan site says 5000:1 on the contrast. It appears to be the same chip as the current XBRs. Unless This is old information on the chip. The main focus may be on the new sensors that drives it to 120Hz.

http://www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/200704/07-033/index.html

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6431524.html

bfdtv

04-07-07, 02:59 PM

I believe the SXRD chip is going to have to have a major increase in native
contrast to compete with the new JVC chip - do we know for sure that it
won't?I'm sure we'll hear more at CEDIA, but the information published last week suggests no improvement in contrast.

Note the JVC wire-grid LCOS panels won't be used in RPTVs this year. So what you are really talking about is front projection.

Ohlson

04-07-07, 06:28 PM

Esox50

04-08-07, 10:28 AM

These new 2007 SXRD XBRs, if everything that mikeyf says is true, look like they may be THE TVs to get. I had a 50" XBR, but got rid of it.

mikeyf

04-08-07, 10:53 AM

westa6969

04-08-07, 11:44 AM

The Sony Japan site says 5000:1 on the contrast. It appears to be the same chip as the current XBRs. Unless This is old information on the chip. The main focus may be on the new sensors that drives it to 120Hz.

http://www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/200704/07-033/index.html

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6431524.html
It's unlikely the Japan site is referencing Dynamic CR with those numbers since the current gen has been tested at over 14K CR Dynamic but also seems very high for Dynamic as that should equate to around 25K:1 Dynamic.

I guess what would count most is how well the Iris works to control luminance and shade levels which IMO has always been a strength of the SXRD. Interesting I do not hear of a COnsumer Electronics Show this June in LA, anyone hear of a repeat this year? That's where many announcements were done last year in June for Sony and then we waited and waited until the fall. :)

tonydeluce

04-08-07, 12:41 PM

My bet is that a contrast improved panel is coming. If it comes close to the 20000:1 JVC states for their panels is another story. It is still good the the good old 0.61 gets a 120Hz electronics upgrade.

I agree - and it is smart of Sony not to announce it since no one would probably
buy sets with the current panel..

I guess the question is when?

Hanzo

04-08-07, 03:12 PM

As I recall both the XBR3 and A3000 will have 120hz refresh rate. The XBR3 will have 1.3 HDMI but the A3000 will be 1.2.
The question is what will they look like? I know the XBR3 will have a look similar to the glass bezel on the XBR LCD sets. At least that is what I was told about the prototype at the SONY show. I'm not sure how the cabinets will differ between the two. The XBR3's will be more narrow than the A3000.....by just a couple of inches. I'm told that the PQ is much improved.

I would be really upset if the A3000 was only HDMI 1.2. I realize that Sony has to distinguish between their higher-end and lower-end lines, but there really is no excuse to use an older HDMI standard for a TV being manufactured now. My guess is that Sony will have the XBR line utilitze a new DRC to distinguish the lines.

mikeyf

04-08-07, 03:51 PM

I would be really upset if the A3000 was only HDMI 1.2. I realize that Sony has to distinguish between their higher-end and lower-end lines, but there really is no excuse to use an older HDMI standard for a TV being manufactured now. My guess is that Sony will have the XBR line utilitze a new DRC to distinguish the lines.

Yeah, but that doesn't really bother me. I can't tell you why because I don't understand how important it is to have or NOT have it.

Anyone here can chime in......

MattFoley

04-08-07, 07:30 PM

Esox50

04-08-07, 09:09 PM

As I recall both the XBR3 and A3000 will have 120hz refresh rate. The XBR3 will have 1.3 HDMI but the A3000 will be 1.2.
Also, early rumors (i.e. people posting whats shown up in their buying/inventory systems) suggest that the A3000 series will be 50" & 55" only, while the XBR3 will be 60" and 70" only.

Hanzo

04-09-07, 12:57 AM

I notice a reported upgrade for the upcoming Sony SXRD line is the 120Hz refresh rate. Will this upgrade make a significant improvement in PQ over the current SXRDs? That is, I've seen fast moving scenes on both A2000 and XBR2 sets, and they look pretty good already to me. Is it worth waiting a few months to get this upgrade, or is this something that only videophiles would appreciate?

Thanks

Well, at this point in the game, it's only a few more months until the new ones come out. If they're a lot better, then you will be glad you waited. If they're not, then the current XBR2's will drop down in price to make way for the new models, so either way you win.

JonDeutsch

04-09-07, 09:03 AM

Well, at this point in the game, it's only a few more months until the new ones come out. If they're a lot better, then you will be glad you waited. If they're not, then the current XBR2's will drop down in price to make way for the new models, so either way you win.

My understanding is that the XBR3s will be announced in a few months, but released in October. How is Oct 07 only a few more months? That sounds like 8 months away to me! Then, you're going to pay retail for XBR3s, and want to wait until holiday sales to get the price down, which means you're 9-10 months out from a new TV if you wait for the XBR3s. Right?

Even though I had my heart set on an SXRD set, I think that between the ear'd XBR2, the soft A20x0, and the long release cycle for the XBR3, that I might just end up with a plasma this time around. The excellent 58" Panny only has 720p, but it's comparably priced to the current XBR2. And from 13' away, it probably has a better picture, too.

Any thoughts on this logic?

Dinomon

04-09-07, 11:27 AM

There’s a rumor that SONY is planning to release 80” XBR3. We just have to wait and see now.

goodlookin1

04-09-07, 02:25 PM

No, almost all of the new sets being developed are only designed to accept 1080p through HDMI. I don't know of any that will accept 1080p through component. It would be a hard sell for HDMI if they could.

Being a frequent gamer of Xbox360 and PC, I can assure you that the Samsung HL-S models do 1080p over component, as well as VGA and HDMI. But I think it is the only TV that does 1080p over all video inputs (one of the reasons I got it instead of an XBR). However, this really doesn't hurt HDMI's position because HDMI does Hi-Def audio over the same cable, where Component doesn't do ANY audio (over RBG). THAT is the major difference between the two and is a major selling point for HDMI, along with higher bit depth for better color gradients, etc.

On a side note, I am reading all of these posts about the 120hz refresh rate. Yeah, it seems nice on paper, but other than being able to display 24p content, I dont believe this will make a difference, especially to gamers and here's why: The human eye cannot easily discern the difference of anything much higher than 60 frames per second. Having a 120hz TV will basically be bragging rights for the gamers. However, some of this is debatable: I know some gamers that might disagree with me; that they can tell the difference between 60fps and fps rates above 60. I can't speak on their behalf, but I would bet that if you put two TV's side by side, having one PC displaying 60fps at 60hz and another PC displaying 120 fps at 120hz, most would not be able to tell the refresh rates apart. Moreover, IF one could clearly discern between the two, 120hz would not give much, if any, advantage over 60hz. 60fps at 60hz is plenty for our eyes to interpret the frames as one fluid motion rather than a sequence of still images. Just my humble opinion.

joevfx

04-09-07, 02:51 PM

StevieG

04-09-07, 03:21 PM

The human eye cannot easily discern the difference of anything much higher than 60 frames per second.This is a myth that has been around for many years, however there is zero scientific basis for it. In fact, the myth seems to mutate according to whatever standard is being defended - I've seen 24 Hz, 30 Hz, 60 Hz, and 72 Hz all claimed as the highest refresh rate that the human eye can perceive.

Fact is, the 60Hz refresh standard may have been adopted for any number of reasons, but limits of human perception was not one of them. In my personal experience, I refresh my high-end CRT monitor at 120 Hz when playing games. If I sit down at a monitor refreshing at 72 Hz or 85 Hz, I notice the difference immediately. I would guess that the upper limit of my perception is much higher still (some have proposed that the limit is 500+ Hz).

Bottom line - more is better, and I would wager that most people can notice the difference between 60 Hz and 120 Hz in a side-by-side comparison.

Lots of information on this topic can be dug up via google.

walk

04-09-07, 03:29 PM

Not to start this debate again since certain people will violently disagree with me but...

120hz allows 24p without 2:3 conversion (as well as 30hz and 60hz without requiring expensive multi-sync hardware) - that is the ONE and ONLY benefit of 120hz, it doesn't help reduce flicker (since there is none to begin with) or help you get higher frame-rates in your video games (since they are capped at 60hz, at best).

bcoombs

04-09-07, 04:41 PM

Well, I'm not a scientist, but I did stay at a Holliday Inn Express last night...

Since your eye views everything in analog (not in frames per second), it would seem that any increase in frame refreshing is good. On CRT's it would eliminate the "flickering." On static displays (LCD's, etc.), you would get "smoother" screen changes.

I agree that higher frame rates from gaming consoles aren't applicable, but if one were to use the set as a computer monitor, now we're talking a whole different story.

klawrence

04-09-07, 05:48 PM

Bottom line - more is better, and I would wager that most people can notice the difference between 60 Hz and 120 Hz in a side-by-side comparison.

I agree. It's also silly to assume that what one person can perceive is the same for everyone else. Hell I can change my ability to perceive visually just by drinking alcohol or ingesting caffiene or perhaps other substances. Another way is simply adrenaline or physical exercise, such as going a few rounds with a punching bag. The appeal of most first-person shooters partially relies on immersiveness, adrenaline, excitement. If that's not enough, you can also make yourself more aware of the framerate by panning quickly in a first-person game. I don't expect someone who just got out of bed to be able to tell the difference between small differences in time. It's something you have to work up to. So, more is better and that's the last we should ever have to talk about it (I'm not getting my hopes up hah)

However, lately 120Hz hasn't meant that you can actually pump in 120 unique frames of source and then display each of those frames. With the LCDs every other frame (as in Sharp's D92's) was interpolated to overcome the slow responsiveness of LCDs. The LCD response of the sxrd's is supposedly less than 2.5ms, so I didn't think that blurring was a problem as it is with conventional LCD panels. Therefore maybe they really are going to accept a 120hz source such as one from a computer! I mean certainly the main reason is to do the inverse telecine on 24fps material, or at least, that's all that I've heard people complaining about. But if the processing power is going to be there to do that, then hopefully they will capitalize on it and make computer users happy.

Now the only thing that will make me happy, as a gamer, is not a higher framerate (although that helps, and I have been used to 100 fps for a long time now). Of primary interest is processing lag, and the 50ms or so on the KDS-RxxXBR2's is too much. And that's with a 1080/60p signal coming from the computer over HDMI with no upconverting going on. Processing lag kills the immersiveness for me, and it also kills the ability to really compete. On my dual monitor setup (CRT is main, KDSR70XBR2 is secondary), the response of the mouse pointer between the two displays is like night and day. I can't play FPS games on the TV because suddenly I have to know in advance how far to move the mouse to get the desired result, whereas with CRT, when movement was reflected instantly on screen, I could adjust the speed of the mouse based on that feedback. Shifting the feedback makes me slower than the CRT gamers, and thus, dead. Unless I'm camping, which is boring..

goodlookin1

04-09-07, 07:04 PM

but if one were to use the set as a computer monitor, now we're talking a whole different story.

I am one of those people you are talking about. There is absolutely NO flicker on my TV when hooked up to my PC @ 60 hz. And consoles these days are basically computers. They have RAM, CPU and Graphics Card(s) and even hard drives. They should act no differently than a computer, except that they have less configurable options when it comes to FPS and refresh rates, graphics quality, resolution, etc. I will admit that with CRT based monitors, refresh rates seem to affect flicker. But anything over 60-72 hz gives off no flicker. And this problem is not inherent in LCD type technology (not to mention DLP, LCoS, Plasma, etc).........only CRT technology. The 60-72hz threshold is essentially the cutoff which any increase in hertz results in a lack of a discernable difference. I suppose StevieG is right in saying that there is no "scientific evidence" for my claim, but neither is there scientific evidence for his. The fact is that we DO live in an a world of analog (infinite FPS......absolute continuity), so theoretically, he is right: "More is better". HOWEVER, in practice when applied to movies or games (digital world), our eyes interpret anything from 60hz to 72hz and above as "continuous motion". That's how we can watch movies and see moving images. If our eyes did not work this way, everybody would be seeing a sequence of lots of still images. If the "More is better" theory is correct, that means we would have to be able to tell the difference between 1,000 hz and 1,000,000 hz.......and we simply cannot do that.

For the sake of argument, I will concede that the "real" threshold of what our eyes can perceive is somewhat ambiguous and up to interpretation, but I believe it to be in the vicinity of 60-72 hz (fps).

People have the right to believe whatever they want; so if it makes you sleep better at night that you have 120hz TV vs a 60 hz TV, so be it.

But you won't see me waste my money. Unless you're really into 24p source material, don't bother IMHO.

That's all :D

walk

04-09-07, 07:29 PM

:rolleyes: Again.... flicker is not the issue, there is no flicker on a RP set, the bulb does not flicker (actually it does, but at like 1000hz or something), so the screen does not flicker. The screen still updates at 60hz, or 30hz for interlaced, or 24 for film, the frames are simply repeated as many times as needed to reach 120hz.

The reason it's 120hz is that it's divisible by 24 (5) and 30 (5) and 60 (2), so you can use it for every HD format (and analog too).

Sorry, PAL users are stuck waiting for... what... 600hz chips? :D

Andyisc00l

04-09-07, 10:27 PM

There’s a rumor that SONY is planning to release 80” XBR3. We just have to wait and see now.

Who the **** said that?

bfdtv

04-09-07, 11:29 PM

Who the **** said that?More like wishful thinking. :(

Andyisc00l

04-10-07, 01:20 AM

More like wishful thinking. :(

A full 155% size jump from my current 50" TV for 16:9&4:3...lol..would be nice but I'm guessing it'd cost like $10,000-12,000 even though it is only 30.5% larger then a 70" for 16:9&4:3... although you can't always look at percentages.

80" has 2732.24 sq. inches in 16:9 native
70" has 2092.3 sq. inches in 16:9 native
60" has 1537.62 sq. inches in 16:9 native
50" has 1068.2 sq. inches in 16:9 native

639.94 square inches from 70" to 80", only 554.68 square inches from 60" to 70". and 469.42 square inches form 50" to 60"

mikechorney

04-10-07, 06:40 AM

But you won't see me waste my money. Unless you're really into 24p source material, don't bother IMHO.

That's all :D

However, most HD TV (excluding sports and reality TV) is 24fps, and virtually all movies are 24fps. Unless, all you're doing is watching sports and playing games, there will be a benefit to a 120hz refresh.

EricM407

04-10-07, 10:00 AM

The 60-72hz threshold is essentially the cutoff which any increase in hertz results in a lack of a discernable difference. I suppose StevieG is right in saying that there is no "scientific evidence" for my claim, but neither is there scientific evidence for his. The fact is that we DO live in an a world of analog (infinite FPS......absolute continuity), so theoretically, he is right: "More is better". HOWEVER, in practice when applied to movies or games (digital world), our eyes interpret anything from 60hz to 72hz and above as "continuous motion". That's how we can watch movies and see moving images. If our eyes did not work this way, everybody would be seeing a sequence of lots of still images.

If you're sitting in front of a screen @ 60 Hz right now, and you want to see if your eyes really do interpret that as continuous motion, just move your mouse pointer from one side of the screen to the other moderately quickly and watch it blink its way across. If you did that in 1/10th second, you had 6 samples for the entire width of your screen with huge spaces of motion in between sample updates. I'm not sure how many samples you'd need in that period of time to fill in all the "gaps" and make it appear smooth, but 60 Hz obviously doesn't get it.

StevieG

04-10-07, 11:35 AM

For the sake of argument, I will concede that the "real" threshold of what our eyes can perceive is somewhat ambiguous and up to interpretation, but I believe it to be in the vicinity of 60-72 hz (fps).I guess you can believe whatever you choose to believe, but in my first-hand experience you are simply wrong. Like I said, I can easily tell the difference between 120 Hz and 85 Hz refresh on my computer screen.

The experiment described by EricM407 above is very revealing - move your mouse across your screen quickly, say in 1/10 of a second, and you will see only 6 images of the mouse across the screen at 60 Hz. Contrast this with waving a pen in front of the screen at a similar speed, and the difference is immediate and glaring. So while the mouse pointer @60 Hz successfully creates the illusion of motion, it is obvious (to any observer I would think) that the motion is not truly continuous and does not even come close to mimicking reality.

So I concede that 60 - 72 Hz is adequate to *imply* motion to the viewer, however by no means does it stretch to the limits of human perception. I don't know where the limit is, but based on the mouse pointer test alone, I would wager that it is at least several multiples of 60 Hz.

bcoombs

04-10-07, 01:35 PM

I completely agree. If I wave the pen in front of my face, at any speed, I see CONTINUOUS movement. I have my monitor refreshing at 75Hz, and the mouse cursor is NOWHERE NEAR continuous. It is orders of magnitude different than the pen wave.

GOODLOOKIN1: Not trying to bash you in any way. I hope you do the experiment described above and comment, though. I mean, think about it. Our eyes, as you described, view things in analog, or real time. Ideally, we would want a set that would update/refresh/change in real time. Since that is nowhere near possible with current technology, we want to get as close to that as we can.

60 cycles per second is discernable, as anyone who has been fortunate enough to get zapped by their 110V outlet can tell. You can feel the cycles, and it's nowhere close to feeling "smooth." 120 Hz will be "smoother," and on and on.

walk

04-10-07, 02:03 PM

However, most HD TV (excluding sports and reality TV) is 24fps, and virtually all movies are 24fps. Unless, all you're doing is watching sports and playing games, there will be a benefit to a 120hz refresh.What? No, if you're watching a show from a film source on TV it will have already been converted by telecine.

All broadcast HDTV is 60hz (720/60p or 1080/60i).

EricM407

04-10-07, 08:13 PM

What? No, if you're watching a show from a film source on TV it will have already been converted by telecine.

All broadcast HDTV is 60hz (720/60p or 1080/60i).

Yes, but if it's something that was sampled at 24p and broadcast at 60i, a 120 Hz TV should be able to get the 24 frames put back together, multiply it up to the refresh rate, and completely get rid of the lopsided cadence. I don't know if they actually will do that, but if they're going to the trouble and expense of making a 120 Hz TV then that seems like a smart capability to include.

goodlookin1

04-11-07, 12:53 PM

GOODLOOKIN1: Not trying to bash you in any way. I hope you do the experiment described above and comment, though. I mean, think about it. Our eyes, as you described, view things in analog, or real time. Ideally, we would want a set that would update/refresh/change in real time. Since that is nowhere near possible with current technology, we want to get as close to that as we can.

I totally get what you and StevieG are saying. Yes, I know that if I were to drag my mouse pointer over the screen in 1/10th of a second, it would show up 6 times. And I can "see" that. However, if you have your eyes follow the mouse movement, it doesn't show up as a 6 frames, does it? Rather, it appears as a moving object, a blurry object. So is having it show up 12 times on the screen going to make it any better? In theory, yes. However, in practice, 6 frames vs 12 frames in 1/10th of a second is not that much of a difference........in other words, you might be able to make out twice as many individual frames of that same mouse movement, but they are STILL in frames, and there are STILL large space gaps between the location of the mouse image in each frame, so the mouse is still going to blur when you have your eyes follow it. I guess what I'm really saying is that the gap size in 60hz vs the gap size in 120hz is still too big to differentiate a significant difference between the two.........more so in fast movements like the mouse example. Therefore I would propose that until the speed of the refresh rate/hertz can come down to something in nanoseconds (exadurated a bit), it will never truly look like movement is in real-time. IMO, a 60hz jump from 60hz to 120hz is only one step in a Mile long run towards a "real-time" display. I say SED is a step in the right direction :rolleyes: . Too bad it appears that it is never going to materialize into the market.

But again, a real-time display would really not affect TV. I dont think there will ever be enough bandwidth to support 1080p1000000000 (nanoseconds). And watching movies in real-time rates would make it feel non-movie like. It would really only be better for computers and consoles.....but for me, I still dont think having anything over 60hz/60fps gives any advantage in gaming: Gameplay is already smooth enough and flicker free (This doesnt include CRT monitors).

**** When I say "Real-time", what I mean is "Virtual Real-time". Obviously, anything shot or created in frames can never be true Real-time......that would be an infinite number of frames.

Anyways, I think I've completely derailed this thread......sorry! :( This is my last post on this topic......in this thread :p .

Chris in SD

04-11-07, 01:52 PM

I've had my eye on Sony's SXRD tv's for quite a while and have been holding off on getting one for 2 reasons:

-I want them to fix that darn "Green Blob" issue I keep hearing about.
-I want one that has HDMI 1.3

I didn't hear any news about the 2007 models during CES. Does anybody know when the 2007 models are coming out? Will they use laser light engines? Will they have HDMI 1.3?

Green blob? Fixed in XBR2/A2000

HDMI 1.3? Why? Do you want your TV to decode Dolby TrueHD?

Chris in SD

04-11-07, 01:54 PM

There is a class action lawsuit being filed, but it is for owners of the XBR1, not the A2000. I have an A2000 with color uniformity issues, so I can assure everyone that the green blob has not been completely eliminated. Based on reports, however, it seems to be less prevalent than with the XBR1.

Color uniformity issues are not the "green blob"

EricM407

04-11-07, 06:31 PM

But again, a real-time display would really not affect TV. I dont think there will ever be enough bandwidth to support 1080p1000000000 (nanoseconds).

No, there won't. But a display could still do interpolation to make your eyes think the sample/broadcast rate was equal to the refresh rate on objects in motion or camera pans.

Zero/One

04-11-07, 09:59 PM

Well, at this point in the game, it's only a few more months until the new ones come out. If they're a lot better, then you will be glad you waited. If they're not, then the current XBR2's will drop down in price to make way for the new models, so either way you win.

That is the plan for now. The prices out there on the 70" is getting very hard to resist. I want to see if Sony is going to budge off its 6000 price tag. It has not changed since Black friday weekend last Thanksgiving. If and when Sony drops the price I want to know what the introductory price will be on the new lineup. If ithe newer ones are close to the current pricing( $4100.00-5000.00) in stores right now I will be waiting on the newer models. :)

6SpeedTA95

04-11-07, 10:06 PM

That is the plan for now. The prices out there on the 70" is getting very hard to resist. I want to see if Sony is going to budge off its 6000 price tag. It has not changed since Black friday weekend last Thanksgiving. If and when Sony drops the price I want to know what the introductory price will be on the new lineup. If ithe newer ones are close to the current pricing( $4100.00-5000.00) in stores right now I will be waiting on the newer models. :)
I'm hoping the newer ones will come in a bit cheaper which doesn't seem unlikely given the rapid fall of plasma's over the last couple years. Not to mention LCD's and Plasma's look to continue the plunge this year.

Andyisc00l

04-11-07, 10:13 PM

hopefully sony will get it's ass handed to them in the rear projection and LCD market this year...I think they've been sitting all high and mighty on their little throne too long and they aren't putting much effort in to advancing their TVs..I really hope something is cheaper and better then the SXRD this year..not like I care anyways I buy the best, but still, annoying...mainly because from xbr1 to xbr2 there was no changes in picture quality and from the sounds of it there will be no changes yet again this year..well 120hz and hdmi 1.3..but that is features not picture quality

mikechorney

04-11-07, 10:24 PM

What? No, if you're watching a show from a film source on TV it will have already been converted by telecine.

All broadcast HDTV is 60hz (720/60p or 1080/60i).

As Eric mentioned above, the 3:2 pulldown telecine process introduces judder into movement. A TV with a 120hz refresh, and good electronics should be able to recognize the 3:2 cadence, and display each frame for 5 cycles. The result should be smoother motion.

Smokey Bones

04-12-07, 02:07 AM

I've got a quick question.

Right now I sit at approx 8 ft from my TV screen. My HDTV is a Sony KD30XS955 Direct view HDTV. I've been reading around a little, and to see the difference in 1080p I'd have to get a TV 55'' or higher.

The XBR3's sound awesome, but would a 60'' TV be too much for 8 ft viewing distance?

I've got a PS3, 360, and a Wii, plus HD cable so the HD content is there, I just feel like I'm missing out on the 'HD experience' by watching all of this on a 30'' screen(even if it is an awesome TV)

Keep in mind the depth of the CRT is pretty big, and the depth of the SXRD is probably smaller than it, so I could end up moving it a little closer to the wall. I'd say it could be a 8-8.5'' viewing distance.

qwickdraw4

04-12-07, 12:25 PM

they aren't putting much effort in to advancing their TVs..

from the sounds of it there will be no changes yet again this year..well 120hz and hdmi 1.3..but that is features not picture quality

You have got to be kidding !!!
The PC of the Sony's are already stunning and any PC improvements from this points on will most likely not be in leaps and bounds but rather in barely noticeable if not totally unnoticeable improvements which by themselves are not significant but the accumulative effects may be quantified.
hdmi 3.1 and 120 hz are not minor enhancements not to mention laser is just around the corner. 120hz should realize smoother motion at the very least.
It is hard to improve upon perfection.

walk

04-12-07, 01:55 PM

As Eric mentioned above, the 3:2 pulldown telecine process introduces judder into movement. A TV with a 120hz refresh, and good electronics should be able to recognize the 3:2 cadence, and display each frame for 5 cycles. The result should be smoother motion.
Yeah maybe, but do such electronics even exist? My old Sony RPTV has a CineMotion feature but it's only available in standard-def/480i, it's disabled in all HD modes...

Andyisc00l

04-12-07, 02:02 PM

You have got to be kidding !!!
The PC of the Sony's are already stunning and any PC improvements from this points on will most likely not be in leaps and bounds but rather in barely noticeable if not totally unnoticeable improvements which by themselves are not significant but the accumulative effects may be quantified.
hdmi 3.1 and 120 hz are not minor enhancements not to mention laser is just around the corner. 120hz should realize smoother motion at the very least.
It is hard to improve upon perfection.

XBR1, a2000, XBR2, and a2020 all have roughly the same picture quality...if the xb3 and a3000 has the same picture quality I'm gonna smash my head through a car windshield...I'm not talking DRC 1 vs 2 vs 2.5, brighter bulbs, 1080p input or 60hz vs 120hz..I'm talking picture quality enhancements...which is what most to all people care most about..choice between 120hz or picture quality improvements? I thought so..

I mean make the a3000 have the same picture quality...but for the ****ing xbr3 make the huge $4,000 price tag mean something jeeze.

And if you are even serious when you say the SXRD is "perfect"..then I don't know what to say..it is great, but not perfect, they can improve easily.

EricM407

04-12-07, 06:43 PM

Yeah maybe, but do such electronics even exist?

Well, the electronics to convert things to cadences for 120 Hz probably don't (because it's really not being done), but the math behind them is uncomplicated enough. It would probably be easier (cheaper) if the processing only did 5:5 on a true 24 Hz input and just doubled everything else with whatever cadence it had when it was transmitted. If they do that, I think it will be a shame.

bfdtv

04-12-07, 06:55 PM

Yeah maybe, but do such electronics even exist? My old Sony RPTV has a CineMotion feature but it's only available in standard-def/480i, it's disabled in all HD modes...It certainly exists. Whether Sony will spend the extra to include that capability is unknown.

JVC RPTVs are able to detect the 24p source within 1080i signals, for output to the screen with pulldown to 60p. Pioneer plasmas and Panasonic 1080p plasmas also do it.

walk

04-12-07, 07:39 PM

How does it detect this? I know with DVDs there is a flag encoded on the disk that tells the player "this is a 24p film source", but there's no such flag with broadcast HDTV is there?

bfdtv

04-12-07, 09:40 PM

How does it detect this? I know with DVDs there is a flag encoded on the disk that tells the player "this is a 24p film source", but there's no such flag with broadcast HDTV is there?Much of the content on broadcast and cable is flagged, but the only hardware that has access to those flags is the decoder inside the STB/DVR. Flags are part of the MPEG-2, MPEG-4, and VC-1 specifications. They tell the decoder what to do. They cannot tell your display what to do, unless you happen to be using the MPEG-2 decoder inside your TV.

Once the MPEG (or VC-1) bitstream from broadcast, cable, or HD-DVD is decoded by the STB, DVR, or HD-DVD player, there are no more flags. All you have at that point is the cadence. With 1080p24 content delivered using 1080i60, like you you get with Blu-ray and HD-DVD players set to output as 1080i, as well as movies and episodic programs like CSI on CBS, Heroes on NBC, and The Sopranos on HBO, you have the following signal:

Frame1, Field1
Frame1, Field2
Frame1, Field1
Frame2, Field1
Frame2, Field2
Frame3, Field1
Frame3, Field2
Frame3, Field1
Frame4, Field1
Frame4, Field2
Frame5, Field1
Frame5, Field2
Frame5, Field1

This is known as a 3/2 cadence. You have three fields of one frame, two fields of the next, and the cycle repeats.

The fields highlighted in bold are sent using repeat flags, a few bytes which tell the MPEG-2 decoder to repeat a previous field. Only 48 unique fields of information -- each containing half the information in a full 1080p frame -- is typically transmitted every second with 24p content. Compare that to 1080i video, such as sports, where 60 different fields of information is sent every second. For that reason, 1080p24 source content requires less bandwidth to broadcast than video, not more.

The display processor must determine the cadence of the input signal by comparing the fields. If every field is unique, then the source is video. If every fifth field is a duplicate, then the display processor knows that the source is 24p**; it can eliminate the duplicate fields and reconstruct the original 24p frames through a process is known as inverse telecine. Inverse telecine produces an image that is identical to the 1080p source. Once this is done, pull-down is applied to repeat the full 1920x1080p frames to match the refresh rate of the display (i.e. 60Hz). At that point, depending on your TV, the image is output directly to the screen, [or] digitally scaled to add overscan, or digitally scaled to fit a lower-resolution panel. On a display that correctly performs inverse telecine, there will be no difference between the 1080i and 1080p output from a Blu-ray player.

Most modern displays can detect the 3/2 cadence on 480p24 content flagged as 480i60 (i.e. DVD), but only a minority can do the same with 1080i60 signals. It is more computationally intensive to do this with high-definition, and many display makers skimp on high-def processing to cut costs. On displays that cannot detect the 3/2 cadence necessary to reconstruct the original 1080p frames, they treat the source as video. They either bob to display the signal as 540p -- as was the case on older/cheaper displays -- without interpolating information to complete the 1080p frame, or they interpolate new information based on adjacent fields to complete the 1080p frame (known as motion-adaptive video deinterlace).

Progressive frames created from interlaced content through interpolation will never be as good as material originally acquired in 1080p and reconstructed with inverse telecine. More information in this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10070516&&#post10070516) and the linked article.

** It's not actually quite this simple. Most film-sourced content on cable and broadcast is distributed with the appropriate repeat flags to minimize bandwidth use. But there are times when film-sourced content is distributed and compressed like video. Generally, broadcasters and cable companies like to avoid that, because it wastes bandwidth, but not every broadcast affiliate uses modern encoding equipment.

When content is distributed without those flags and compressed like video, the cadence is still 3/2, but due to compression, every fifth field may not be bit-for-bit identical to a previous field. Hence, to provide reliable inverse telecine, a display processor must not only detect bit-for-bit identical repeated fields, but it must also detect when every fifth field is nearly identical. This requires more analysis, and thus more computational power.

walk

04-12-07, 09:51 PM

bfdtv

04-12-07, 10:09 PM

Thanks. Detecting duplicate frames would be difficult, I would think, given that there's no guarantee the same image run thru JPEG/MPEG compression will come out the same, bit-for-bit, on the other end.If duplicate fields were sent using flags, then the fields would be identical. But yes, there are times when film-sourced content is distributed and compressed like video. Generally, broadcasters and cable companies like to avoid that, because it wastes bandwidth, but not every broadcaster uses modern encoding equipment.

It's not uncommon for broadcast groups to upgrade an affiliate in a major market with new equipment, and then send that affiliate's old equipment to another station they own in a much smaller market. Some of that "hand me down" equipment may be a decade old and not transmit the appropriate flags for film-sourced material.

strutter

04-13-07, 10:21 AM

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6431524.html?nid=2402

fanerman

04-14-07, 07:11 PM

Are we still looking at summer/fall for the new SXRD's to come out?

Stew4msu

04-14-07, 08:41 PM

The answer to your question and many more can be found in this very thread.

WOLVERNOLE

04-15-07, 11:49 PM

[QUOTE=Andyisc00l]XBR1, a2000, XBR2, and a2020 all have roughly the same picture quality...if the xb3 and a3000 has the same picture quality I'm gonna smash my head through a car windshield...

I mean make the a3000 have the same picture quality...but for the ****ing xbr3 make the huge $4,000 price tag mean something jeeze.

-I recommend "De-caf." :rolleyes:

monnkey2

04-17-07, 05:20 PM

Zero/One

04-17-07, 07:10 PM

So, I'm very confused. Will these tv's actually get rid of 3:2 cadence, or will they instead just double it and give us a 6:4 cadence. WHY go to the trouble of making the tv 120hz if it won't actually do anything?

Some one correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was more like 24fps output x five = 120.

westa6969

04-17-07, 07:58 PM

Some one correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was more like 24fps output x five = 120.
I believe your proposed equation is the correct one. Film masters and Broadcast masters are done in 24fPs and the 120 matches. = Smoooother Motion.

Doesn't ever mean motion will never occur but smoother transitions and much less. Sharp D92 has it and a former Sharp USA rep posted yesterday how it can be tested within the menu to demo it works but it doesn't mean it will resolve all motion. I've read here on this forum that it should provide a much more film like effect especially with fast pans and action sequences and of course the LCD's need a bit of extra help in this area.

Perhaps Sony will have a similar 120 test within it's menu system - I know it's been demo'd at trade shows this past year with side by side panels but that's rather difficult to replicate in your home.

It's just another step in the maturation of HDTV and a good one at that. :)

To better understand the 1080P/24 and the 120Hz please read this page (or read all five parts of the series):

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_14_1/feature-article-1080p-3-2007-part-3.html

TAllenSr

04-18-07, 09:36 AM

To better understand the 1080P/24 and the 120Hz please read this page (or read all five parts of the series):

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_14_1/feature-article-1080p-3-2007-part-3.html

Wow...what a GREAT article...thanks for the link! I have read plenty of similar explanations, but the animations on this article make it hard to beat. The only part I take issue with is the declaration that "CRTs Are Dead". They are "dead" to the manufacturers, but I just bought a lovely brand new Hitachi 1080i "dinosaur" for only $600, and it looks great. And as this article points out, CRT is the only tech that can truly display 1080i (not to mention the only tech with pure blacks). I know...this is a rant for another thread or two already running on AVSF. ;)

Thanks again for the link!

Regards,
Troy

spider4re

04-18-07, 04:13 PM

does anyone know if 120HZ will prevent the "macroblocking" i see during scenes with explosions and/or fire and scenes (concert footage) with strobe effects with my 60"XBR2? I am thinking of taking sony up on their offer to replace my tv and thought this might be a good reason - in addition to losing the side speakers.

Thanks.

strutter

04-18-07, 04:25 PM

westa6969

04-18-07, 04:38 PM

strutter

04-18-07, 04:44 PM

Compression can be helped with the Algolith Flea - that's it's specialty. :)

and we wouldnt need it if providers would stop compressing the crap out of the video signal .

joevfx

04-18-07, 05:50 PM

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6431524.html?nid=2402

so basically they are saying that the new 120hz chip probably wont be released in north america anytime soon.

spider4re

04-18-07, 06:05 PM

and we wouldnt need it if providers would stop compressing the crap out of the video signal .

HDTV expert (Pete Putman) says that cable (Comcast) is the best source for the least compression on HD channels.

Would a flea really help with this?

Stew4msu

04-18-07, 06:11 PM

HDTV expert (Pete Putman) says that cable (Comcast) is the best source for the least compression on HD channels.

Would a flea really help with this?

I'm no HDTV expert, but FiOS has less compression than Comcast.

I would also think the compression of Comcast varies by area.

walk

04-18-07, 06:35 PM

Comcast does not re-compress, they pass along the signal just as it arrives from the source. It can't get any less compressed than that.

strutter

04-18-07, 07:21 PM

so basically they are saying that the new 120hz chip probably wont be released in north america anytime soon.

i read it to say that no info was available about its introduction in north america.

strutter

04-18-07, 07:30 PM

HDTV expert (Pete Putman) says that cable (Comcast) is the best source for the least compression on HD channels.

I've always been under the impression that over the air was the least compressed source. albeit not many channel choices.

and to actually answer your question about the 120hz. according to this article
http://www.twice.com/article/CA6431524.html?nid=2402
it will help with fast motion blocking.

WOLVERNOLE

04-19-07, 02:21 PM

So, what does THIS have to do with the topic in question? (When are the 2007 Sony SXRD's coming out?) Another highjacked topic.

bradster56

04-19-07, 11:12 PM

I read the 55A3000 will retail for 2899.00...not sure how accurate that info is.

MattFoley

04-20-07, 08:06 PM

I read the 55A3000 will retail for 2899.00...not sure how accurate that info is.

The current pricing for the 55A2020 is around $2699 as a base, but it goes much lower in most places. I hope the new A3000 series will be priced in the same general range.

Hanzo

04-20-07, 10:18 PM

Green blob? Fixed in XBR2/A2000

HDMI 1.3? Why? Do you want your TV to decode Dolby TrueHD?

Well, yes! Why wouldn't I buy a tv that supports all the latest technologies? They have Blu-ray players out there that support dolby truehd now. I'm not one of those people that buys a new tv every 3 years, so if I'm going to hang onto a tv for 5-8 years I want to make it as future-proof as possible Maybe there's not much use for "Deep Color" right now, but who knows what will happen in 2 years.

zoro

04-20-07, 10:41 PM

I need true colors lol

bradster56

04-21-07, 09:05 AM

Actually many sites (not all) have the 2020 at the 2699.00 price but according to the Sony website the price is 2499.00.

6SpeedTA95

04-21-07, 09:07 AM

Actually many sites (not all) have the 2020 at the 2699.00 price but according to the Sony website the price is 2499.00.
Which size? The 2020 is available in three different sizes.

bradster56

04-21-07, 03:09 PM

55a2020 = $2499.00

anthonyl

04-29-07, 10:14 PM

Wow, not much price difference between the 2020 and 3000 series, if projections hold.

audio_man01

05-01-07, 12:47 AM

Here's a photo of the '07 XBR SXRD set. ETA around October.
http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

Dinomon

05-01-07, 12:54 AM

Here's a photo of the '07 XBR SXRD set. ETA around October.
http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg
That's the LCD version of SXRD XBR3 (which is already on Sony's site for $33,000).

kelpie

05-01-07, 07:57 AM

Here's a photo of the '07 XBR SXRD set. ETA around October.
http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

That's a very interesting photo audio_man01. Can you tell us where you got it? Any more?

That's the LCD version of SXRD XBR3 (which is already on Sony's site for $33,000).

Are you sure, Dinomon? From the photo audio_man01's display looks something like an LCD flat panel, but the 70" LCD XBR3 is not a SXRD (as the display in audio_man01's photo is labeled), in the photos on Sony's site the LCD XBR3 has a clear outer bezel that this display lacks, the LCD XBR3 has wider black bezels on the sides (apparently to accomodate the speakers), etc. All-in-all audio_man01's photo looks different from the $33,000 XBR3 on Sony's website. I'd be curious to hear more about it myself.

audio_man01

05-01-07, 09:14 AM

As memory serves, this photo IS a photo of Sony's new body style 60/70 (sorry, can't recall which this is a photo of) rear pj SXRD set. The set is mounted to Sony's matching (optional purchase) stand. Sony displayed this (and it's other sized bother) on this stand with a PS3 for 1080p source and an ES receiver on the shelf below the TV. The receiver was SUBSTANTIALLY deeper than the TV ... and yes looking at this TV/stand configuration straight on certainly gives one the appearance of a "thin" flat panel TV.

Photo was taken in late February '07 in Vegas at Sony's 2007 USA Dealer "Open House." I have an additional side view of this TV/stand that I'll post when I get home this PM.

kelpie

05-01-07, 09:46 AM

Thanks for the additional info audio_man01. I'd certainly like to see your other photo when you get a chance to post it. Do your original photos have any more resolution than what you posted? I'd also like to see an enlargement of the blue and white info tag on the left side of the stand if it's legible.

I'm sure that specifications could change between the February show and the ~October release date, but any thoughts on where the speakers are on the display in the photo?? You don't suppose that they're "dumbo ears" in a box somewhere ready to bolt on (like the 70XBR2), do you? ;)

Dinomon

05-01-07, 10:56 AM

Are you sure, Dinomon? From the photo audio_man01's display looks something like an LCD flat panel, but the 70" LCD XBR3 is not a SXRD (as the display in audio_man01's photo is labeled), in the photos on Sony's site the LCD XBR3 has a clear outer bezel that this display lacks, the LCD XBR3 has wider black bezels on the sides (apparently to accomodate the speakers), etc. All-in-all audio_man01's photo looks different from the $33,000 XBR3 on Sony's website. I'd be curious to hear more about it myself.
This is not a Rear Proj TV (look closly at the TV Base, it's for LCD). Sony haven't released any photo on their new SXRD XBR3 TV. On May 12-14th, there's a new line up show coming up in NY, may be we'll see something after that.

Josh2160p

05-01-07, 10:59 AM

Josh2160p

05-01-07, 11:07 AM

This is not a Rear Proj TV (look closly at the TV Base, it's for LCD). Sony haven't released any photo on their new SXRD XBR3 TV. On May 12-14th, there's a new line up show coming up in NY, may be we'll see something after that.

Well, it's definitely not the 70XBR3 LCD......that's for sure. You can tell by looks alone. Look how thin Samsung's new LED projection set is. Why wouldn't Sony come out with something similar or better?

barrysb

05-01-07, 11:08 AM

This is not a Rear Proj TV (look closly at the TV Base, it's for LCD). Sony haven't released any photo on their new SXRD XBR3 TV. On May 12-14th, there's a new line up show coming up in NY, may be we'll see something after that.

Does anyone know for sure if Sony is going to be an exhibitor at the Home Entertainment Show 2007? Their name is not on the official list, but did have a sizable presence at the 2005 NYC show.

audio_man01

05-01-07, 12:25 PM

spider4re

05-01-07, 12:36 PM

Do you have to use the attached stand or can i put this on an existing tv stand?

From the picture it looks like the tv is supported from that 1' wide piece below the screen.

Josh2160p

05-01-07, 12:43 PM

Guys - I've been doing this a very, very long time (about 3 decades) and have no desire to waste anyone's time. YES, this is a SXRD REAR PJ TV on a killer looking stand.

If you go back in posting time, you'll see that I broke the news on an exciting new technology that Sony was calling SXRD. This was before the Qualia 004, Ruby, Pearl, et.al.

Hey I never doubted you. I've already seen a new Sony Bravia 40S3000 at freakn Target of all places. I know this set is only a 720p LCD, but it's good to see some new Sony products in stores for 2007 already.

And I could see Sony releasing the new XBR projection in August. I don't think we'll have to wait until October for Sony's new top of line.

UxiSXRD

05-01-07, 01:56 PM

That looks pretty damned cool. I'll miss the silver/black thing they had going, but always wanted a glowing Sony logo like the Q006. :D 120hz, dual HD tuners, and multi-direction/path CableCARD and it will be upgrade time.

Dinomon

05-01-07, 02:17 PM

Guys - I've been doing this a very, very long time (about 3 decades) and have no desire to waste anyone's time. YES, this is a SXRD REAR PJ TV on a killer looking stand.

If you go back in posting time, you'll see that I broke the news on an exciting new technology that Sony was calling SXRD. This was before the Qualia 004, Ruby, Pearl, et.al.
Then how come it doesn't have a depth (at-least there would be some Depth) on a RPTV. This picture looks like their new XBR3 LCD. BRAVIA is for LCD. http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=KDL52XBR3&Dept=tvvideo&CategoryName=tv_flatpanel_46to52

HD AV

05-01-07, 02:53 PM

I don't believe that's an SXRD XBR. I have "What's Kewl @ CES" on the DVR and the 60 and 70 shown as the new model look exactly like the SXRD XBR2 except for the depth. There is a panning shot of the new 60 and 70 on stands and I could not tell a difference from the current design. I have talked with someone who saw the set at the show and he told me that it was just a slimmer version of the XBR2, approx. 11" deep, but it could be wall mounted. Yes, it's 120hz with a few added bells and whistles, but appearance is almost identical.

joevfx

05-01-07, 03:39 PM

strutter

05-01-07, 04:23 PM

Then how come it doesn't have a depth (at-least there would be some Depth) on a RPTV. This picture looks like their new XBR3 LCD. BRAVIA is for LCD. http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=KDL52XBR3&Dept=tvvideo&CategoryName=tv_flatpanel_46to52

it does look amazingly similar to the bravia. and the sign behind it does say bravia .......but is says SXRD also. Sony adding to the mystery me thinks.

he said he had a pic from the side, this should show the depth, when he posts it.

thrasher8

05-01-07, 04:27 PM

Here's a photo of the '07 XBR SXRD set. ETA around October.
http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

Thanks for the pic...keep them coming. :)

For the doubters out there...I know for sure this is NOT the 70XBR3 LCD for $33,000

I've seen the 70XBR3 LCD at CES and it looks exactly like a bigger version of the 52XBR3 LCD (Floating Glass design all around)

This picture does not have the same design.

Josh2160p

05-01-07, 05:02 PM

Thanks for the pic...keep them coming. :)

For the doubters out there...I know for sure this is NOT the 70XBR3 LCD for $33,000

I've seen the 70XBR3 LCD at CES and it looks exactly like a bigger version of the 52XBR3 LCD (Floating Glass design all around)

This picture does not have the same design.

Couldn't agree more. I think the stand really helps give it the appearance of an LCD. The new glass design is far better. I really like how the floating glass sticks out at the bottom of the frame with the Sony logo. Much much better looking.

mikeyf

05-01-07, 05:52 PM

it does look amazingly similar to the bravia. and the sign behind it does say bravia .......but is says SXRD also. Sony adding to the mystery me thinks.

he said he had a pic from the side, this should show the depth, when he posts it.

Have to see it from the side. The new 60" SXRD XBR3 (also heard it was XBR5) is 13" deep. The 70" SXRD is 14" deep. Seeing it sideways should clear it all up. I was also told from someone who saw them in Vegas that they were 'prototypes'-close, but not quite the real thing. Also, the speakers are supposed to be on the bottom and I don't see any speakers in that photo.

thrasher8

05-01-07, 05:59 PM

Not XBR...but still interesting news regarding new Sony TVs from HD Beat:

"Along with that leaked Sony laptop info we saw this morning, there's word on some upcoming Bravia LCDs and projectors due for the UK this summer. Sony's prepping two front projector models -- the VPL-AW10 and VPL-AW15 -- with 6000:1 and 12000:1 contrast ratios, 1300 lumens of brightness, and 1080/24p input via HDMI, though there's no word on actual output resolution. There are also five LCD models in the works: KDL-40D3000U and KDL-40S3000U 40-inch models, the KDL-32D3000U and KDL-32S3000U 32-inch sets, and the KDL-26S3000U 26-inch model. All of the sets are 720p and include Bravia Theatre Sync for sending remote control data, three HDMI inputs (two for the smallest set), and integrated tuners, while the D-series models add 100Hz refresh rates. The projectors and the 100Hz LCDs will be available in the UK beginning in June, the KDL-40/32S3000U LCD models will hit the streets in July, and the KDL-26S3000U will be released in September."

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/05/01/sony-spills-new-bravia-lcd-and-projector-info/

kelpie

05-01-07, 06:02 PM

BRAVIA is for LCD.

Not always. In Asia Sony markets their SXRD's as part of the BRAVIA line. BRAVIA SXRD at Sony India (http://www.sonyindia.co.in/productdetails.do?prod_id=981)

audio_man01

05-01-07, 06:39 PM

kelpie

05-01-07, 06:47 PM

Promised side photos & a shot of Sony feature bullet points:

Thanks audio_man01. Do you have a larger or higher resolution copy of the photo of the tag? I can't quite make out parts of it.

Thanks

audio_man01

05-01-07, 06:54 PM

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/506/KDSZ60XBR5_Tag_Large.jpg

Josh2160p

05-01-07, 06:55 PM

Yeah, thank you very much audio_man01. Many of us have been waiting on these pics for a long time......much appreciated.

audio_man01

05-01-07, 07:01 PM

Keep in mind this is very preliminary data/product. It may end up being exactly as pictured ... or different in ways that we can't anticipate. Other than 120Hz chassis (aka, Motion Flow), picture quality looked very similar to current generation XBR2 product. I suspect other differences, but these sets were not contrasted against current product.

The "magic" of these new sets is the look when perched on Sony's matching stand. Of course the 13-14" depth is nice if you have space issues. For those of you that are curious, it appears that Sony has a fan mounted on the bottom of the set. Perhaps this will put to bed the heat issues that can sometimes pop up when this current SXRD sets are shoved right against the back of a wall/cabinet.

giuseppe001

05-01-07, 07:05 PM

Hi
do you know if the hdmi will be 1.3 ?
Tks
:)

joevfx

05-01-07, 07:14 PM

Hi
do you know if the hdmi will be 1.3 ?
Tks
:)

its says CEC and xcyvv on it ,so yes its 1.3

joevfx

05-01-07, 07:25 PM

Promised side photos & a shot of Sony feature bullet points:

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/KDSZ_SidePhoto.jpg
http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/medium/KDSZ70XBR5_Side.jpg
http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/medium/KDSZ60XBR5_Tag.jpg

wow if those are the specs and the tv actually looks that pretty, its a definite buy for me. Im so glad i waited, now i have ot hold off till october but hopefully it will come out before

slimoli

05-01-07, 07:45 PM

I can't open the original link

http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

Anythink I should do besides clicking on it? Thanks

Sergio

Never mind , I figured it.

Zero/One

05-01-07, 07:48 PM

This links will not work can someone send me a picture or post another link

Thanks
http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

audio_man01

05-01-07, 07:50 PM

Site seems to reassign URL. Go to "Photo Gallery" and search for the picture name. In this example: Sony2007XBR3.jpg and you'll find it.

Zero/One

05-01-07, 07:53 PM

Got it thank you. This thing is sweet.

kelpie

05-01-07, 07:53 PM

Josh2160p

05-01-07, 07:55 PM

I'm just gonna look at it and drool like Homer Simpson for the next few months.

westa6969

05-01-07, 08:11 PM

Not to be a doubter but damn it seems that TV from the front could not possibly be a RPTV head-on. Man oh Man if this is the real deal I'm signing up for October for a 70" HT now that it's slimmed down by about a foot in it's ass and from the front is an Illusionist beauty, about half the price of an upgrade to a 65" Sharp.

Sony appears to be bringing the asthetics to a new deserving level - Good Riddens DUMBO! :D

Though my 57" Sharp is also an awesome panel I am to this day haunted by memories of my SXRD my wife made me sell as she hated it's form factor - I found it hell with SD and Heaven with HD movies and never seen any panel match it in black levels and shadow details - now that's it's been trimmed I can fit a 70" upstairs in the loft where the wife doesn't rule with her WAF! Freedom!

Damn that's got to be the best looking RPTV I've ever seen and hope it's the real deal and not just another prototype. :)

eric.exe

05-01-07, 08:15 PM

joevfx

05-01-07, 08:19 PM

I can't open the original link

http://gallery.avsforum.com/uploads/63567/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

Anythink I should do besides clicking on it? Thanks

Sergio

Never mind , I figured it.

i cant figure it out what did u do?

westa6969

05-01-07, 08:22 PM

Does any one know if these 120Hz sets have "true 120Hz"?

Reason I ask is in the Cnet review (http://reviews.cnet.com/Sharp_LC_52D92U/4505-6482_7-32306273.html) of Sharp LC-52D92U they say: Sharp also adds a 120Hz frame rate conversion mode to the spec sheet, which is not the same as a true 120 Hz refresh rate . They also state that it didn't help at all.

What's the difference between "true 120Hz" and... "non-true 120Hz?" And which one does it have?
I suggest that two factors make this true 120Hz as it's spec'd at 120Hz and it says in the Tag Sheet that it does 24fps - if this is factual you cannot ask for much better. Also, I suggest CNET may not have known how to invoke testing the 120Hz tests - Sharp has a test it'll run from within the menu to demo 120Hz but it does not do 24fps as only less than a handfull of panels can do 24p.

Most owners are unaware Sharp has the 120Hz built in to self test it's impact and perhaps CNET also wasn't aware. We only know because we have a former SharpUSA Exec that informed us how to drill down to it.

As film and broadcast masters are done in 24fps this should be a perfect match in many cases for true smooth and hopefully judder free displays on the next gen SXRD.:)

Zero/One

05-01-07, 08:22 PM

i cant figure it out what did u do?

Use this one

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

slimoli

05-01-07, 08:44 PM

As audio_man01 said, the original photo is still in the gallery if you search for it. I found it at http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/Sony2007XBR3.jpg.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/Sony2007XBR3.jpg

We are talking about 2 different sets, aren't we? the front picture has a sign that says XBR3 and the side picture is the XBR5.

Sergio

Zero/One

05-01-07, 09:21 PM

audio_man01, do you have a full view of the side of this TV?

joevfx

05-01-07, 09:45 PM

We are talking about 2 different sets, aren't we? the front picture has a sign that says XBR3 and the side picture is the XBR5.

Sergio

this isnt the same TV as the side shots, notice how the PS3 is gone in the frotn shot whiel u can cleary see it in the forground of the side shot.

audio_man01

05-01-07, 09:48 PM

One photo is the 60 the other is the 70" The front shot (with Italian image) is the 60" SXRD. If you can read XBR3 on any of those tags, your eye sight is better than mine.

Hanzo

05-01-07, 09:49 PM

I don't think the side pictures are the same tv. If you notice in the side shots, there is a Playstation 3 on the top shelf of the console. In the front shot, there is no PS3 on the tv stand at all. :confused:

mikeyf

05-01-07, 10:11 PM

audio_man01

05-01-07, 10:13 PM

kelpie

05-01-07, 10:35 PM

I think that I've beat this one to death ... and then some.

Yeah, I'm sure that it does seem that way. We do appreciate your time. Thanks for posting. Unfortunately I'm afraid that many of us have just begun to chew on this. I know that I for one am chomping at the bit to see the 60" from the side and the 70" from the front. (How's that for mixing metaphors?) :D

Keep in mind this is very preliminary data/product. It may end up being exactly as pictured ... or different in ways that we can't anticipate....

The "magic" of these new sets is the look when perched on Sony's matching stand. Of course the 13-14" depth is nice if you have space issues.

Just playin' around here, but I was looking at the pictures of the side of the 70", and frankly I kinda hope that these pre-production models of the matching stands do change by the time they go on sale. Yes, the display looks great on the pedestal, but if you assume the 70" set is 14" deep, that would put the bottom of the set at ~28" from the floor in those pictures. That would put the center of the screen at ~45" which is really higher than ideal for my seating position. I'm hoping that Sony had taller-than-production pedestals on the stands for the dealer show since they knew that the viewers would be standing.

J__Chris

05-02-07, 04:45 AM

great work getting these photos out

giuseppe001

05-02-07, 04:50 AM

great work getting these photos out

great photo, great sony sxrd, but with these new features ( slim than 40 % ) what will be the final price?
now the price of 70 inch in italy is about 5.5k, the new model ?
:confused:

Zues

05-02-07, 06:17 AM

Looks like a Bravia SXRD to me :D

Could there possibly be no SSE with the new sxrd..?

Man a 70in sxrd,no sse, in a near flat panel form with glass would be sweet.

audio_man01

05-02-07, 09:50 AM

Interesting point to be made about "Bravia." Sony has found that this new LCD marketing name - BRAVIA - has been wildly successfuly in much the same way that - WEGA - was successful a decade ago when Sony introduced "flat" CRT picture tubes.

Towards that end, we'll see BRAVIA plastered over a wide range of Sony video related products in 2007. This will include new SXRD TV's as well as Sony's "Dream" Theater Surround systems and heaven knows what else.

EricM407

05-02-07, 11:23 AM

Towards that end, we'll see BRAVIA plastered over a wide range of Sony video related products in 2007. This will include new SXRD TV's as well as Sony's "Dream" Theater Surround systems and heaven knows what else.

It's true. They seem to be calling their version of the HDMI 1.3 CEC interoperability feature BRAVIA Sync (or something like that), so anything (A/V receiver, BD player, TV, etc.) that uses it will now be BRAVIA, by default.

slimoli

05-02-07, 12:27 PM

Maybe the TV looks nice on the crazy stand but ,without a flat bottom, how can millions of potential users like me place it on an existing regular stand? In my case I already have a built in wall unit with space for a 70" (currently a 73" Mitsubishi) but not with this kind of "Jetsons" stand.

Sergio

Zues

05-02-07, 01:00 PM

joevfx

05-02-07, 01:40 PM

I think that I've beat this one to death ... and then some. I snapped this photo of '06 vs. '07 form factor.

verbiage at bottom of poster is marketing.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/medium/Sony_2006vs2007_SXRD_XBR.jpg

isnt that a picture of thier LASER rear projection SXRD prototype? ive seen a picture of that laser TV before and it looks exactly like this comparison shot. Im not quit sure this is the new lamp based XBR

Ineedanewtv

05-02-07, 02:08 PM

isnt that a picture of thier LASER rear projection SXRD prototype? ive seen a picture of that laser TV before and it looks exactly like this comparison shot. Im not quit sure this is the new lamp based XBR

The laser SXRD prototype at CES was only a 55-inch set. I was also told at CES that their laser SXRDs were still two years away from market.

audio_man01

05-02-07, 02:19 PM

The laser SXRD prototype at CES was only a 55-inch set. I was also told at CES that their laser SXRDs were still two years away from market.

Agreed. "Laser" SXRD was shown at Jan '07 CES, but was nowhere to be found at this February Sony Line show. I did ask about the "Laser" SXRD and was told that it was still under development and my rep refused to even give me an ETA.

Interestingly, an earlier prototype of this "Laser" SXRD was shown at the 2006 Sony Dealer Line Show (not '06 CES). The unit shown at the '07 CES show was completely different.

The new 60/70" XBR SXRD's have a similar (but clearly different) form factor.

htwaits

05-02-07, 02:26 PM

The new 60/70" XBR SXRD's have a similar (but clearly different) form factor.Do you mean between the screen sizes there is a different form factor?

Thanks for pictures. :)

joevfx

05-02-07, 02:31 PM

Agreed. "Laser" SXRD was shown at Jan '07 CES, but was nowhere to be found at this February Sony Line show. I did ask about the "Laser" SXRD and was told that it was still under development and my rep refused to even give me an ETA.

Interestingly, an earlier prototype of this "Laser" SXRD was shown at the 2006 Sony Dealer Line Show (not '06 CES). The unit shown at the '07 CES show was completely different.

The new 60/70" XBR SXRD's have a similar (but clearly different) form factor.

im just sayign that advertisment shot, of the 40% slimmer TV with the old really deep rear projection looks like an ad for there future laser TV ( even if it is 2 years away). just showing how slim the tvs will get.

audio_man01

05-02-07, 03:18 PM

Negative. The 40% difference poster pictures 2006 SXRD (currently available product) vs the new 2007 XBR SXRD (when it ships much later this year). YES, the difference in size IS THAT SIGNIFICANT!!!!

There was not a photo or sample of the laser SXRD at this SONY ONLY show.

To me, here's the long and short of it.

1) IF you need a shallow mount TV and SXRD gets you going - wait for new '07 SXRD due out FALL '07.
2) HDMI v1.3 to me is a hit the snooze and go back to sleep "feature." Why?
a) Will it work? Given current HDMI "handshake" issues, I'll believe it when I see it. As a dealer/installer, I've been burned WAY, WAY too many times.
b) To take advantage of 1.3(a), the SENDING device will also need to be 1.3. I'll probably die of old age before my local cable provider switches boxes to 1.3. Sure, new version Blu-ray and presumabily HD-DVD players will feature 1.3, but the black level improvements and color accuracy improves are VERY slight (to my eyeballs) AND the kicker, 95-98% of my viewing will be CABLE, NOT DVD. I presume that product life changes will occur faster with DirecTV/DISH, but we'll have to wait and see, especially given the horrendous HDMI issues that DISH has been having.
c) Here today, gone tomorrow. How long before HDMI v1.x ... or 2.x, makes 1.3 obsolete?
3) 120 Hz frame rate IS significant.

IF you need a TV today, go for current SXRD. They are GREAT TV's. Saving your dollars in a cookie jar? Spend less on your summer vacation and come see your favorite A/V dealer late summer/fall for the new stuff. REMEMBER, regardless of what you buy today, it WILL be obsolete tomorrrow, so buy it and don't look back (at least for a year or two).

In my personal case, the 60/70 XBR's are too big for my viewing room. I'll pounce on the new KDS-50A3000's when they ship around July/August. Shallower than current product (I don't really care), but with 120Hz frame rate. The new A-series won't have Bravia-PRO decoding engine and won't have the brigher light source of the XBR units and I seem to recall that they do have HDMI 1.3 (snooze, rollover for a year or two).

walk

05-02-07, 03:32 PM

As audio_man01 said, the original photo is still in the gallery if you search for it. I found it at http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/Sony2007XBR3.jpg.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/503/Sony2007XBR3.jpg
That is obviously a XBR3 LCD mounted on one of those stands with an integrated flat-panel mount.
http://akamaipix.crutchfield.com/products/2006/158/h158KD52XB3-f_MT.jpeg + http://www.sanus.com/images/products/display/PFFP2b_280px.jpg
Nothing special really.

lovswr

05-02-07, 04:18 PM

audio_man01 you make good points, but you have to remember. The vast majority of members here are tech GEEKS :eek:

I mean I'm thnking about an 60" A2020 (so my 42A10 can go upstairs), but that new 40% slimmer, 60-incher is SO DAMN SEXY! :) I don't know if I can hold off until Oct, so I probably will get that A2020 & my STR-DA5200ES is only HDMI 1.2a but DAMMIT, I WANT MY NEW SLIM SXRD NOW :D

UxiSXRD

05-02-07, 04:38 PM

Thanks for all the news, audio_man... So nothing bigger than 70?

kelpie

05-02-07, 04:39 PM

That is obviously a XBR3 LCD mounted on one of those stands with an integrated flat-panel mount.

Nothing special really.

Interesting walk. Maybe you can explain.

Since it's obvious that this is clearly a different display from the one that you posted a picture of...
and since it's obvious that the display in the photo is billed as a SXRD microdisplay in the sign behind it...
and since it's obvious that Sony has engineered SXRD RPTV's with thinner cabinets...
and since it's obvious from the detail placard on the stand of this set that this is the KDS-Z60XBR5 1080p SXRD...

...how do you figure that it's "obvious" it's a "XBR3 LCD"? Just curious as to how you arrived at that conclusion based on the evidence that is available to you.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/506/KDSZ60XBR5_Tag_Large.jpg

mikeylu

05-02-07, 05:08 PM

I think i'll wait on gettting the xbr 2 to see what the new 07 SXRD will be like.. i think it'll be worth the wait from the controversial pictures..lol hopefully more news will be availabe within the next couple of weeks..

mikeyf

05-02-07, 05:25 PM

That is obviously a XBR3 LCD mounted on one of those stands with an integrated flat-panel mount.
http://akamaipix.crutchfield.com/products/2006/158/h158KD52XB3-f_MT.jpeg + http://www.sanus.com/images/products/display/PFFP2b_280px.jpg
Nothing special really.

No way they are the same sets. Just look at the floating glass bezel-it only exists on the bottom of the XBR 5.

audio_man01: if you read this could you elaborate on your viewing distance? I, like you, thought a 60" might be too large but I'm rethinking that idea. Everyone I talk to says 9.5 ft. is perfect for a 60" set. What's your distance?
Thanks for the photo's. I was told the A3000 has the same cabinet style but that doesn't make sense. Have you heard anything about that?

walk

05-02-07, 05:39 PM

I don't know why it says SXRD probably that was a generic banner.
The placard in the big picture says XBR3 - it's obscured a little bit but it definitely does not say XBR5. I don't know what that inset placard is but it's obviously not from the same model. My guess is a union guy doing the set up at the tradeshow got the placards wrong, those guys are not rocket surgeons. :)

That is clearly a Bravia LCD, it has the same floating glass panel. Maybe ever-so slightly different, this new year's model I guess, but it's definitely an LCD no question about it.

joevfx

05-02-07, 05:42 PM

No way they are the same sets. Just look at the floating glass bezel-it only exists on the bottom of the XBR 5.

audio_man01: if you read this could you elaborate on your viewing distance? I, like you, thought a 60" might be too large but I'm rethinking that idea. Everyone I talk to says 9.5 ft. is perfect for a 60" set. What's your distance?
Thanks for the photo's. I was told the A3000 has the same cabinet style but that doesn't make sense. Have you heard anything about that?

9.5 feet is perfect. remember this is a 1080p TV, its not a large SD tv, so closer is better. thats the point of HDTVs to get as close as possible to a large screen TV so you feel immersed in the movie. Everywhere i look it says 7 feet is the minumum for a 60 inch 1080p TV. So u can still sit 7 feet from the screen and see a perfect picture, im gonna be 10 to 9 feet away from my 60 inch XBR 5 when it comes out.

Dinomon

05-02-07, 05:59 PM

Is Sony planning to skip XBR3/XBR4 and go straight to XBR5

kelpie

05-02-07, 06:15 PM

I don't know why it says SXRD probably that was a generic banner.

Uhhh....yeah....generic banner. Uh, huh. That's it. Yeah, that, er, makes sense. (not)

The placard in the big picture says XBR3 - it's obscured a little bit but it definitely does not say XBR5.

And exactly where is this placard that says "XBR3"? I see a placard on the stand on the right that says "XBR" with a stylized "R", but I see no "3". Perhaps there's some other placard that you're talking about. Can you point it out for me please?

I don't know what that inset placard is but it's obviously not from the same model.

Obvious to you maybe. Audio_man01 was there and he seems to think it's from the same model. I for one don't have enough evidence to tell him he's wrong. In fact, I draw the opposite conclusion from what I see.

That is clearly a Bravia LCD, it has the same floating glass panel. Maybe ever-so slightly different, this new year's model I guess,

So it's clearly the same, yet it's different. I'm liking your logic better all the time here walk ole buddy! Perhaps it's even more different than you suppose?

but it's definitely an LCD no question about it.

No question, eh? It's amazing to me the conclusions that people reach sometimes despite the evidence to the contrary staring them in the face. Can you come up with a better reason why this photo "obviously" depicts a Bravia LCD other than you say so?

joevfx

05-02-07, 06:16 PM

Is Sony planning to skip XBR3/XBR4 and go straight to XBR5

i think XBR3 is the name givin to there current LCD line , if u go to there website the new 70 inch bravia is an XBR3

audio_man01

05-02-07, 06:29 PM

#1 What model numbers these sets actually end up being is anyone's guess. By the time that '06 models came to market, many of the model numbers had changed from Sony's '06 dealer show.

AT THIS POINT, new LCD XBR sets will be XBR4/5 (Silver/Black, respectfully).

Why Sony skipped over XBR3/4 and went to XBR5 for SXRD is a mystery to me. As a guess, given the similar (front on look) they wanted to avoid model number confusion.

To answer an earlier question, my current arrangement puts me about 6 feet from the TV, so 60" is too big. 50, possibly 55" for me. The irony is that I really don't watch TV, maybe 2 hours a month, so this purchase is for my family, I'll listen to two channel audio.

A3000 series cabinet in depth is between current models and the new XBR5 SXRD sets. Cosmetically, these A3000's are certainly not as sexy as the 60/70 XBR stuff. From a front on view, the A3000's look pretty close to the current A2020 stuff. I think that I've already deleted all photos of that new chassis style - if I happen to have any saved, I'll see if I can find and post.

80" not to my knowledge, but Sony does tend to keep a few surprises up their sleeve, so although I doubt it, I won't completely rule it out.

walk

05-02-07, 06:40 PM

I'm probably looking more at the A3000 line since I can't spend $Texas on a new TV this year...

fanerman

05-02-07, 06:41 PM

If the A3000 series is coming out in July/August, I'll wait for those. I wouldn't be able to buy a TV til early July at the earliest anyway, so I might as well see what the hoopla is about for the A3000 series.

The kicker for me is the 120hz refresh rate. I've noticed 3:2 pulldown and it's annoying. And I would really be annoyed if I bought the A2020 when I could have waited just 1 more month and got the A3000 and not have to worry about the issue. The slimmer set also would be pretty useful.

kelpie

05-02-07, 06:57 PM

Look maybe I'm wrong,

So you're saying that perhaps it's not so "obvious" and "clear" that audio_man01 is wrong? You certainly haven't presented anything but your opinion that you were correct in your statements.

Well if there's one thing the internet teaches us it's that you can make your opinion into 100% undisputable statements simply by expressing them using sarcastic, condescending tones!

Another thing the Internet teaches us is that there is no lack of people who are willing to state their opinions as undisputable fact by saying that what they believe is "obvious" or "clear" or "no question" despite the evidence to the contrary. We also learn that usually someone will come along to call them on it, often in sarcastic and condescending tones toward people who show a propensity to dispense incorrect or unsupported information as undisputable truth.

sammycasey17

05-02-07, 07:05 PM

I'm surprised it took so long for photo's to come out.

Thats what I was thinking. But thanks for the great pics. :)

Stew4msu

05-02-07, 07:08 PM

joevfx

05-02-07, 07:12 PM

mikeyf

05-02-07, 07:16 PM

9.5 feet is perfect. remember this is a 1080p TV, its not a large SD tv, so closer is better. thats the point of HDTVs to get as close as possible to a large screen TV so you feel immersed in the movie. Everywhere i look it says 7 feet is the minumum for a 60 inch 1080p TV. So u can still sit 7 feet from the screen and see a perfect picture, im gonna be 10 to 9 feet away from my 60 inch XBR 5 when it comes out.

joe you are my new hero. If you could only help me pay for it........

audio_man01

05-02-07, 07:21 PM

Well if there's one thing the internet teaches us it's that you can make your opinion into 100% undisputable statements simply by expressing them using sarcastic, condescending tones!

Look maybe I'm wrong, I'm just skeptical. Actually I hope I am wrong because that's one sexy looking RPTV if it is one, and my wallet would be open. Though I'm probably looking more at the A3000 line since I can't spend $Texas on a new TV this year...

I can't fault your skepticism. When I first saw these new SXRD's, I flipped out and did a double take AND I WAS IN THE ROOM WITH THEM. So photos from an unknown source that could have easily played Photoshop would certainly make me a skeptic too.

In time, I'm sure that more info will seep out on these new sets. I posted this information to help out. ANYONE that reads this forum is a hopeless geekhead (me included). We're probably talking well less than 1% of the general population. Geeks live for the day to own the latest and greatest. For whatever reason, there seemed to be a lack of clarity as to current/future models of SXRD. As a salesperson, I find that lack of clarity translates into a lost sale, so I figured that I could provide information and let each of you decide what and when you wanted to pull the trigger. Putting myself in the customer's shoes, I would want to be provided with future technology information and then be given the choice as to whether to wait or buy now.

Sony obviously isn't too concerned about total secrecy, since there were many attendees snapping photos and I certainly never saw a non-disclosurer form to sign before walking into this show.

Some additional useful info:
http://redigitaleditions.com/ActiveMagazine/welcome/twi/twi070312.html

MattFoley

05-02-07, 08:10 PM

The A3000 series cabinet in depth is between current models and the new XBR5 SXRD sets. Cosmetically, these A3000's are certainly not as sexy as the 60/70 XBR stuff. From a front on view, the A3000's look pretty close to the current A2020 stuff. I think that I've already deleted all photos of that new chassis style - if I happen to have any saved, I'll see if I can find and post.

When do you expect Sony to release official news of the A3000 series?

joevfx

05-02-07, 08:14 PM

I can't fault your skepticism. When I first saw these new SXRD's, I flipped out and did a double take AND I WAS IN THE ROOM WITH THEM. So photos from an unknown source that could have easily played Photoshop would certainly make me a skeptic too.

In time, I'm sure that more info will seep out on these new sets. I posted this information to help out. ANYONE that reads this forum is a hopeless geekhead (me included). We're probably talking well less than 1% of the general population. Geeks live for the day to own the latest and greatest. For whatever reason, there seemed to be a lack of clarity as to current/future models of SXRD. As a salesperson, I find that lack of clarity translates into a lost sale, so I figured that I could provide information and let each of you decide what and when you wanted to pull the trigger. Putting myself in the customer's shoes, I would want to be provided with future technology information and then be given the choice as to whether to wait or buy now.

Sony obviously isn't too concerned about total secrecy, since there were many attendees snapping photos and I certainly never saw a non-disclosurer form to sign before walking into this show.

Some additional useful info:
http://redigitaleditions.com/ActiveMagazine/welcome/twi/twi070312.html

interestring, it says there high end 2007 LCDs that are comign out will definitly be 1080p/24fps, i guess that means the new XBRs will also do this. thats awsome. THere hasnt been anyword about deep color though. I hope the new XBRs will do 10bit processing and have a 10bit panel at the very least.

Hunt-N-Peck

05-02-07, 08:19 PM

I can't fault your skepticism. When I first saw these new SXRD's, I flipped out and did a double take AND I WAS IN THE ROOM WITH THEM. So photos from an unknown source that could have easily played Photoshop would certainly make me a skeptic too.

In time, I'm sure that more info will seep out on these new sets. I posted this information to help out. ANYONE that reads this forum is a hopeless geekhead (me included). We're probably talking well less than 1% of the general population. Geeks live for the day to own the latest and greatest. For whatever reason, there seemed to be a lack of clarity as to current/future models of SXRD. As a salesperson, I find that lack of clarity translates into a lost sale, so I figured that I could provide information and let each of you decide what and when you wanted to pull the trigger. Putting myself in the customer's shoes, I would want to be provided with future technology information and then be given the choice as to whether to wait or buy now.

Sony obviously isn't too concerned about total secrecy, since there were many attendees snapping photos and I certainly never saw a non-disclosurer form to sign before walking into this show.

Some additional useful info:
http://redigitaleditions.com/ActiveMagazine/welcome/twi/twi070312.html

Thanks for everything you've posted thus far audio_man01! It really is appreciated.

Your patience is also.. admirable (I'll take my euphemism of the year award now :D )

audio_man01

05-02-07, 08:29 PM

Ineedanewtv

05-02-07, 08:34 PM

Yes and yes.

My quest is nearly at an end!

mikeyf

05-02-07, 08:38 PM

interestring, it says there high end 2007 LCDs that are comign out will definitly be 1080p/24fps, i guess that means the new XBRs will also do this. thats awsome. THere hasnt been anyword about deep color though. I hope the new XBRs will do 10bit processing and have a 10bit panel at the very least.

Yes they support deep color but isn't that a moot point? I thought that was a feature that would be useless until some point way, way, in the future.

joevfx

05-02-07, 08:51 PM

Yes they support deep color but isn't that a moot point? I thought that was a feature that would be useless until some point way, way, in the future.

i really dont think it will be way way into the future, once developers get a grip on teh PS3 archetecture im sure u will see games that are done in deep color. plus id rather buy a TV now that will use features that arent out yet so im not buying a new TV every 2 years. But anyway i dont see anywhere saying the new XBR will support deep color. it says it supports XVyyc but thast totally different.

Zero/One

05-02-07, 10:07 PM

What is “xvYCC”?
HDMI 1.3 adopts use of the IEC 61966-2-4 color standard, commonly called xvYCC (shorthand for Extended YCC Colorimetry for Video Applications). This new standard can support 1.8 times as many colors as existing HDTV signals. xvYCC lets HDTVs display colors more accurately, enabling displays with more natural, vivid colors .

What is the difference between “Deep Color” and “xvYCC?”
Deep Color increases the number of available colors within the boundaries defined by the RGB or YCbCr color space, while xvYCC expands the available range (limits) to allow the display of colors that meet and exceed what human eyes can recognize.

sammycasey17

05-03-07, 12:03 AM

S4Sammy

05-03-07, 12:41 AM

Audio_man01, do you remember if the screen has the clear glass surrounding the whole screen like the old XBR'950 lineup or just outside border like the newer 70"SXBR? Thanks

And thanks for the great first pictures.

I hope it's not a full glass screen. I've got major glare coming from my current "old school" CRT TV. My wife will veto any glass screen television and I've been waiting patiently for a new TV. :(

audio_man01

05-03-07, 12:44 AM

Audio_man01, do you remember if the screen has the clear glass surrounding the whole screen like the old XBR'950 lineup or just outside border like the newer 70"SXBR? Thanks

And thanks for the great first pictures.
Don't recall. Photos seem to indicate (on SXRD XBR) Plexiglas on bottom only and black border on top/sides. These shows tend to be somewhat overwhelming, so many details simply aren't noticed when looking at hundreds of new items during one long walk through. Lugging a camera around helps, but unfortunately, most of these photos were deleted by accident. PC Inspector (smart memory card recovery) retrieved some of them, but many were overwritten and gone. My favorite was a still shot of two TV's side-by-side demoing "Motion Flow." I was blown away that a pretty basic point and shoot camera captured in a single frame that demo, but alas that photo didn't survive.

sammycasey17

05-03-07, 12:46 AM

I hope it's not a full glass screen. I've got major glare coming from my current "old school" CRT TV. My wife will veto any glass screen television and I've been waiting patiently for a new TV. :(

My old crt was the same way, but I actually like more and more the glass screen on my 70" xbr. Its one of the things that I felt was missing on the new SXRD. I actually would love to see the glass screen return this year. Or at least it would be great if could be removed or added for those who prefer it like the dumbo ears this year.

S4Sammy

05-03-07, 01:00 AM

My old crt was the same way, but I actually like more and more the glass screen on my 70" xbr. Its one of the things that I felt was missing on the new SXRD. I actually would love to see the glass screen return this year. Or at least it would be great if could be removed or added for those who prefer it like the dumbo ears this year.

I believe that with most of the new Sony's SXRD, they have an anti-glare coating on the screen. I noticed on the XBR's that the bezels tend to be glossy. I guess I'll have to wait and see how the new XBR5's turn out.

monnkey2

05-04-07, 02:05 PM

cctvtech

05-04-07, 03:08 PM

I'm still not clear on something. And please, be gentle with me because I am new at this. But my understanding is that DVD players will play a DVD with 3:2 pulldown. So will this TV convert that 3:2 signal into 24 fps. Or will it simply still play it with the pulldown effect, only instead of showing 3:2 it shows 6:4 (simply because 120hz is twice as much as 60hz).Good question. With a 120Hz refresh rate, you would not want 3:2 pulldown since 24fps would play perfectly on it with no "judder".

mikechorney

05-04-07, 08:51 PM

I'm still not clear on something. And please, be gentle with me because I am new at this. But my understanding is that DVD players will play a DVD with 3:2 pulldown. So will this TV convert that 3:2 signal into 24 fps. Or will it simply still play it with the pulldown effect, only instead of showing 3:2 it shows 6:4 (simply because 120hz is twice as much as 60hz).

What it SHOULD do, is detect the 3:2 pulldown, and re-construct the original 24 fps source. It SHOULD then display 4 cycles of each frame, followed by 1 frame of 'no picture' - and do that 24 times a second.

No one will KNOW for sure until someone gets to test the actual TVs.

cctvtech

05-05-07, 12:46 AM

What it SHOULD do, is detect the 3:2 pulldown, and re-construct the original 24 fps source. It SHOULD then display 4 cycles of each frame, followed by 1 frame of 'no picture' - and do that 24 times a second.

No one will KNOW for sure until someone gets to test the actual TVs.It won't need 3:2 pulldown and will give better motion if it is disabled. 120Hz refresh rate will display each film frame 5 times (120/5=24).

EricM407

05-05-07, 08:29 AM

EricM407

05-05-07, 08:43 AM

It won't need 3:2 pulldown and will give better motion if it is disabled. 120Hz refresh rate will display each film frame 5 times (120/5=24).

Yes, that's simple if you give it a 24 Hz source. I think he was asking what happens with a 60 Hz source carrying 24p content that's already in a 3:2 cadence. The TV will need to be smart enough to detect the cadence and get the frames back in order, or else 120 Hz will have no benefit.

monnkey2

05-05-07, 02:20 PM

GBPorter

05-05-07, 06:45 PM

Yes, that's simple if you give it a 24 Hz source. I think he was asking what happens with a 60 Hz source carrying 24p content that's already in a 3:2 cadence. The TV will need to be smart enough to detect the cadence and get the frames back in order, or else 120 Hz will have no benefit.

I don't think the tv can make it back into a 24hz signal, it will deinterlace it and display it as 4 30hz pictures (4 x 30 = 120). The 120hz display shines with the 24hz signal. The reason for the 120hz display is that it can handle the 24hz and 30/60hz signals without having to change the scan rate (120hz vs 60hz) of the tv.

Greg

mikechorney

05-05-07, 07:04 PM

Why would it need a blank frame?

It will make the motion appear smoother. Our brains are very good at connecting dots, so they deal very well with different pictures 'flashed' in front of us. On LCDs, there is a constant picture (no gaps like on CRTs). and our brain has a harder time 'connecting the dots' - resulting in the perception of jerkier movement. Throw in a black screen, and our brain perceives the motion as smoother.

The current gen XBR2 does a good job at detecting 3:2 pull-down on a 480i source. The reviews I've read suggest it doesn't do as good a job on 1080i sources. The reason the detection is so important, is that most non-reality, non-live broadcast HDTV is filmed in 1080P24, and broadcast at 1080i30. To get the best out of those shows, you need to have the TV detect it.

Of course with Blu-Ray (or HD-DVD) the TV doesn't need to do the detection, and conversion.... You simply need to feed the TV the 1080P24 source.

I would be VERY dissappointed with Sony, if the new XBRs couldn't accurately detect 3:2 pulldown in 1080i, and recover the 1080P24 source.... Otherwise, a lot of the benefit of the 120Hz goes to waste.

Of course, no one will know until someone gets to test the TV.

EricM407

05-05-07, 09:24 PM

It will make the motion appear smoother. Our brains are very good at connecting dots, so they deal very well with different pictures 'flashed' in front of us. On LCDs, there is a constant picture (no gaps like on CRTs). and our brain has a harder time 'connecting the dots' - resulting in the perception of jerkier movement. Throw in a black screen, and our brain perceives the motion as smoother.

I'm not sure how having a blank at an interval like that would make things "smoother" in any way. What you're really talking about is play a frame, then have a blank, 24 times a second. It makes no difference how many times you repeat the frame between blanks because of the way modern displays work. Repeat it a thousand times or play it one time between blanks - you see the same exact thing. So what you describe would be the equivalent of a movie projector at 24 fps, which is known to result in unacceptable flicker.

I'm pretty sure this isn't in Sony's plans.

I would be VERY dissappointed with Sony, if the new XBRs couldn't accurately detect 3:2 pulldown in 1080i, and recover the 1080P24 source....

I would be too. But I also wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have that capability. They'll be selling a solution (1080p24 players), and most people probably won't know or won't care if it doesn't ideally handle other sources.

Hunt-N-Peck

05-05-07, 11:54 PM

Shot in the dark; but has anyone got an idea of what light source these things will be using? Replacing bulbs, even seldomly, is not an appealing prospect.

UxiSXRD

05-06-07, 01:06 AM

IIRC laser is still a couple years off so these will most likely be using replacable UHP lamps.

lipcrkr

05-06-07, 01:45 AM

OK, this is confusing. The picture of the gorgeous XBR5 is the successor to the current XBR2 SXRD right? And these will come only in 60" and 70"?. And these are confirmed as RPTV's? Now, the new A3000 SXRD's will come in 50", 55", and 60" right? OK, now the really confusing part....the A3000 will look like the current A2020? Why? Why would Sony drastically change the appearence of the same two TV's? Yes, i know the XBR would have more features but they are the same model. Is there a picture of an A3000? This would really suck if the A3000 keeps the same basic cabinet while the XBR5 gets a total makeover. 60" is just too big for me. Then again, with the LCD look it might fit dimension wise closer to 55".

Andyisc00l

05-06-07, 02:21 AM

So has anyone confirmed picture quality improvements are not happening for yet another year? Only 120hz and HDMI 1.3? In other words, the exact same thing as the Qualia 006, XBR1, and XBR2 with some minor differences..? Not forgetting to mention the A2000/2020. Darn?

andy

Weyland Yutani

05-06-07, 07:02 AM

I suppose it's really too early to say for sure since Sony hasn't officially announced the final specifications for the 2007 SXRD's so I might just be spinning my wheels here, but I'm trying to understand how Sony is going to implement the 120Hz frame rate. They're calling it "MotionFlow" and on their website (for the 70" LCD XBR3) they describe MotionFlow by saying:

Motionflow™ High Frame Rate technology doubles the amount of frames from 60fps to 120fps and does it the right way by using real-time calculation of every single frame of video to create entire new frames of information. The results are spectacular and unlock a new level of motion reproduction. Motion performance is smooth and natural and movies are free of “judder”.

And on the picture of the tag that audio_man01 posted for the KDS-Z60XBR5 SXRD RPTV Sony says it will have "MotionFlow (120hz/black insertion)".

So they're going to interpolate frames on 60Hz sources and use black frame insertion? How will 24Hz sources be handled? I've seen discussions about how there are good ways of implementing 120Hz, and bad (less expensive) ways of doing it, but I haven't seen a clear concise discussion of exactly how it is to be done if done well. I understand what mikechorney was saying about the advantages of black frame insertion and how the human brain perceives motion in rapidly changing static images, and that sounds like a good thing. EricM407 raises the question of flicker, but doesn't current 3:2 pulldown result in an effective 30Hz image on current 60Hz displays, and would an effective 24Hz/fps image flicker on a 120Hz SXRD display? I know that I don't notice flicker on a 24fps film in a theater.

Any guesses on what Sony will do with 120 Hz, and any opinions on what they should do if they're going to do it right?