71" 21:9 TV - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 32 Old 07-16-2012, 07:15 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
New Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Hi

I'm starting a new electronics brand and one of the LCD/LED backlit screens I am manufacturing is a 71" 21:9 3D TV .

I would love some input on what you all think.

I am going after a niche market of people whose taste is not catered for by mainstream brands. I look around in electronics stores and everything looks the same. Who decided that all TV's should be rectangular black plastic boxes.

Also, I don't think it's acceptable that TV's come with such poor sound quality that you have to buy a whole new amp and speakers. They all seem to have assumed that we will sacrifice almost everything to get a TV that's just a little bit thinner. The blu ray, cable-box and speakers need floor-space so I don't gain much benefit. Plus I don't want to drill into my living-room wall to hang it.

I think 71" 21:9 TV's are wide enough to hold decent speakers- they could even be used to cover the vertical black bars for 16:9 content and then slide out for 2.35:1 in a similar way to the curtains at the movies when the previews end and the movie begins.

The 58" that Philips and Vizio sell is not quite big enough for me (although they are both cool).

What do you think? are there a bunch of people out there in my niche who prefer chrome to plastic and want a TV that is optimized for movies instead of desperate housewives and with quality surround sound built-in?
New Design is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 32 Old 07-16-2012, 07:45 AM
 
Aknot5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
There's a niche for large (70"+) 21:9 displays for sure. But I can almost guarantee that it won't overlap much with the crowd that would use built-in speakers or want chrome trim.

Stick with a nice thin black bezel; from reports I've heard the new flat black / brushed aluminum trim on the 90" Sharp is pretty awesome. That might be a nice way to go. Glossy black looks nice, but the less reflections the better.

Picture quality is where it's at, none of this edge-lit nonsense like Vizio is bringing.

The ability to turn off the LEDs on the border of 16:9 content would make masking a non-issue.
Aknot5 is offline  
post #3 of 32 Old 07-16-2012, 07:47 AM
Senior Member
 
wlcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
The target market that would buy a 71" 21:9 TV is not going to use the TV speakers
wlcohen is offline  
post #4 of 32 Old 07-18-2012, 04:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,384
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Be sure it can support a true 2560 x 1080 input. Apparently the current line up of Phillips and Visio units can not.

Offer a D6500K calibrated mode.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #5 of 32 Old 07-19-2012, 01:14 PM
Member
 
0utf0xZer0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Not to get off topic, but who tested the Vizio with the 2560x1080 input? I'd heard that the Philips couldn't handle it, but I've never heard of anyone testing the Vizio.

But yes, I'd consider that an essential feature too, particularly for HTPC use.
0utf0xZer0 is offline  
post #6 of 32 Old 07-19-2012, 04:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,384
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0 View Post

Not to get off topic, but who tested the Vizio with the 2560x1080 input? I'd heard that the Philips couldn't handle it, but I've never heard of anyone testing the Vizio.
But yes, I'd consider that an essential feature too, particularly for HTPC use.

I've seen a couple of the Phillips TVs now, but have not seen a single unit from Visio. Maybe I jumped to the conclusion that it was the same as the Phillips and be limited to 1920 x 1080 inputs as well.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #7 of 32 Old 07-21-2012, 03:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 4,336
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Design View Post

Hi

I'm starting a new electronics brand and one of the LCD/LED backlit screens I am manufacturing is a 71" 21:9 3D TV .

I would love some input on what you all think.

I am going after a niche market of people whose taste is not catered for by mainstream brands. I look around in electronics stores and everything looks the same. Who decided that all TV's should be rectangular black plastic boxes.

Also, I don't think it's acceptable that TV's come with such poor sound quality that you have to buy a whole new amp and speakers. They all seem to have assumed that we will sacrifice almost everything to get a TV that's just a little bit thinner. The blu ray, cable-box and speakers need floor-space so I don't gain much benefit. Plus I don't want to drill into my living-room wall to hang it.

I think 71" 21:9 TV's are wide enough to hold decent speakers- they could even be used to cover the vertical black bars for 16:9 content and then slide out for 2.35:1 in a similar way to the curtains at the movies when the previews end and the movie begins.

The 58" that Philips and Vizio sell is not quite big enough for me (although they are both cool).

What do you think? are there a bunch of people out there in my niche who prefer chrome to plastic and want a TV that is optimized for movies instead of desperate housewives and with quality surround sound built-in?

Ok - maybe I'm from Missouri, but on very 1st post you claim to be starting a new electronics brand and what not?
Smells fishy in my common sense.

Mike R,P.E. clickable DIY hot links:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
..
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mtbdudex is offline  
post #8 of 32 Old 07-21-2012, 05:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,384
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post

Ok - maybe I'm from Missouri, but on very 1st post you claim to be starting a new electronics brand and what not?
Smells fishy in my common sense.

Hey if he can do it, then all the power to him.

His challenge will be establishing brand name recognition. It can be done if he is able to offer a good product that is either priced less than current offerings or one that offers better features than the current offerings.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #9 of 32 Old 07-21-2012, 01:50 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
New Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
It's not that you are from Missouri smile.gif You're just skeptical which I understand. If you look at all the no-name junk TV brands out there, you'll see that it's not really far fetch at all.

Anyone can start an electronics brand if they have the drive to do it and enough money. My business is normally in the intellectual property space. I fund inventors to bring their products to market. The funds come from PE firms, hedge funds and wealthy individuals (I live in New York where they all live)

Making electronics is a lot easier than new inventions because at least people know what the product is and we know that there is a market for it. As Cavx says, brand recognition is the hard part. People tend to assume that brands they haven't heard of are low-end junk and they are normally right.

A significant portion of the TV's currently on the market are not made by the company that owns the brand. Philips are made by Funai here and TPV in Europe. The most popular LCD brand here, Vizio, have never made a single TV. It was started in 2002 by one guy(you may remember it because it would have smelt fishy to you). As the largest selling brand in the US, they still only have 120 people. I think it's inspiring!

Contract manufacturers will make TV's for anyone with the cash. They will even do all the distribution and servicing. Even Sony are trying to go that route.

I found the capital for this to be easier to raise because the chances of losing everything is significantly less than with new inventions. Even if it doesn't make a profit, it is unlikely that we would get nothing for the stock.

I'm not telling you this because I need your approval, I want people to know how "possible" it is. I wish more people would do it. Large brands have a vested interest in holding back the latest technology because they don't want to make their stock obsolete or devalue it. They also don't make products for people like me. If I could already buy the product I want, I probably wouldn't do it.

I have already ordered my panels, Inverters and drivers etc - they are on-route to my assembler. One way or another, I'm making TV's. If they sell or not is a different matter. Worst case, I'll be left with a few thousand really wide TV's in a warehouse somewhere.

To me, the brand of the panel inside is more important than the one on the enclosure.
New Design is offline  
post #10 of 32 Old 07-21-2012, 02:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HopefulFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,807
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 145 Post(s)
Liked: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

It can be done if he is able to offer a good product that is either priced less than current offerings or one that offers better features than the current offerings.
These are the big challenges aren't they...
It seems to me that companies who offer niche AV gear can only do it by offering premium products at slightly below market prices (companies like Outlaw and Emotiva are what I'm thinking of). The trouble I have is seeing small-batch 71" glass at anything close to the pricing that Panasonic, Samsung, and Sony can. If you can get that under control, then it's a matter of adding the features (properly implemented) that set you apart from the main stream - features like frame-rate support, the 2560x1080 input, not to mention solid motion handling, calibration menus, etc, etc... I suppose you can't expect all the calibration options that you get on an $8,000 projector, but that's who you'd be up against, right? For me personally to be in the market for this, it would have to offer full color management system, 24fps at 96Hz (or better), the ability to manage aspect ratios/zooming/black bars in a wide variety of ways, plus the normal picture quality attributes of top (or maybe second) tier TVs. It's a high bar, and I'd still have a lot to think about before I spent money on it, you know? Things like - I can't take it back to Best Buy if it dies - and shipping will be a huge hassle; so I need to be confident in the manufacturer/retailer to handle any problems expediently. What kind of options are there for mounting this? A stand is okay for some folks, but I'd need a more refined look.

I'm sure there is a Bose/Apple way to handle this, but if that's the approach you can count me out - I don't shop at The Sharper Image.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
HopefulFred is online now  
post #11 of 32 Old 07-22-2012, 07:26 AM
Member
 
Count Alucard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Where would you release this?

If you really want to do something unique that sets you apart from your competition, make the whole sound section one high-quality center, spread out over the whole casing, to be used with an external set (like, 7.1 minus the center) and hooked up to an AVR – THAT would be an innovation.

As that would add quite some costs, offer another version sans any speakers at all, because, as remarked above, your audience won't use them, anyway, if they're of the as-usual variety.

Since you seem to be serious about this, I would imagine you've already taken a closer look at what's currently on the market, so maybe you can help me with my questions in this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1420069/owners-of-philips-cinema-21-9-tvs-and-philips-bd-players-please-help/0_100
Count Alucard is offline  
post #12 of 32 Old 07-22-2012, 11:56 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
New Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Hey Hopeful Fred

I agree with your points. There are some exceptions where niche players attract a significantly higher price than the large brands. Look at Bang and Olufsen. I love their marketing!

I don't plan on competing with $8000 projectors. If people have a dedicated room, money for an anamorphic lens and a quality screen etc, they should go that route. I am making (or should I say, having made) TV's in a price range that is less than half of that at the top end. I plan on targeting a niche that isn't currently served by existing brands.

My panels will be made by one of the top 5 panel makers and I'm only using grade A New panels. All of the features you mentioned are already part of the spec and in some cases, significantly exceeded. The exception is the color management system. I'd love to understand a little more about what you'd like to see in that respect and where your source material currently comes from (blue-ray, dvd, download, stream etc). I started this thread to get input so I can market something that people want so your help is really appreciated. You obviously know you stuff in this area. To the extent that it's viable, I will make changes based on this kind of input.

Sony has significant economies of scale and definitely don't sell at a low price point. In my opinion, they aren't even that good anymore (well not like they used to be).

With the caveat that I haven't been through their books with a fine tooth comb, I think their problem is:
- There isn't as much "economy of scale" in panels as you might think and panels are 80% of the total cost (give or take)
- They have to fund an enormous fixed cost infrastructure in plant, equipment, R&D, retail outlets and hundreds of thousands of employees -I don't have that issue
-They are riding on the back of multiple failed content platform launches.
-Technology moves so quickly that they are forever having to discount to dump old stock - I will make less and focus 3-4 models
-With all that fixed infrastructure, they can't exactly make fewer TV's - their pricing has to account for a percentage of the output being sold at a loss (I don't)
-The backdrop to all of this is falling sales and increasing competition - I don't plan on competing in the mainstream or selling enough for anyone to notice

In many ways, the smaller guys are better placed to profit in this market. I have a lot of respect for what Vizio are doing. Because of them, thousands of people in lower income brackets can afford 65" 3D movie screens. They make a profit while Sony can't seem to make money in this business .

While a lot of people will disagree with me, I think the current path that the large corporates are taking with new technology is massively misguided. It isn't surprising that they are experiencing customer fatigue and a lack of excitement for new product launches. They are becoming almost more niche than me smile.gif I saw Sony demoing one of their 4k projectors. The amount of money they had spent on the R&D was unbelievable. Yet again they have forgotten the golden rule for new technology in this space which is content, content, CONTENT!

So now the latest batch of TV's are back in the $4000+ range. Cable hasn't even caught up to the 1080p standard yet. In the most part, I see the trend going the other way with the rise in popularity of internet streaming (I looooooove Netflix). I have the most expensive internet package that Time Warner offered me and streaming Netflix is pushing up against it's limit. The guy doing the 4K demo said one movie would have to come on 20 blu-ray discs.... I tried to explain 4k to my wife and I may as well have been trying to explain nuclear physics and rocket science in chinese while standing on my head, rubbing my nose and patting my belly at the same time. BTW the trend part isn't just my opinion, my brother works for a company that makes cable boxes. They are worried about streaming making them obsolete so they are working with the cable providers to lock-in content like live sporting events to slow their imminent demise.

From my point of view, I'm thinking screw 4K, the F...ING SCREEN IS STILL THE WRONG SHAPE FOR MOVIES! (sorry, my inner-monologue curses a lot). The panels are already available without the need for more R&D, just give me one! The guy who gave us the Betamax Video, Minidisc and HD DVD is obviously still working there and still missing the point - Learn a lesson already.

Everyone has things that are important to them. When I see the calibrated TV next to the uncalibrated one in Best Buy - I think, I see the difference, but if they weren't side by side, I wouldn't notice. It's my expectation that a $3,000 tv should come already properly calibrated and Best Buy should stop trying to squeeze more money out of people.

If I see black bars, it ruins my enjoyment of the movie. Being given the choice of losing 1/3 of the picture or 1/3 of the screen size, suddenly 4K feels like the wrong priority for me. A director goes out of his way to shoot an amazing wide shot and these guys are ruining it for me so that desperate housewives and Gossip Girl get a full screen.

I know filling a 21:9 screen means expanding the picture but I have a plan on the content side too. To me it's still preferable to black bars. Black bars is what started me importing electronics from Asia as a 13 year-old. I grew up in the UK where they used 50hz TV's instead of 60hz like here and Japan. The Pal standard had 625 lines compared to 525 lines used in the NTSC standard. Because of this my Pal Nintendo and Neo Geo had black bars covering 17.5% of the screen and the games ran17.5% too slowly. It aggravated me so much that I started a business importing them from Japan and the US to sell in the UK. In some cases, I had to drill through the casing and soldering a scart lead directly to the motherboard so it would work on UK TV's. I know that's a little OCD for a 13 year old but I just one things to be the way they are supposed to be.

I had a laserdisc player then too and was watching 2.35:1 movies on a 4:3 screen and have been wanting a solution for this ever since....
New Design is offline  
post #13 of 32 Old 07-22-2012, 01:19 PM
Member
 
Count Alucard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Design View Post

The guy doing the 4K demo said one movie would have to come on 20 blu-ray discs....

That can't be right. 2160p is four times the resolution of 1080p and there are newer, more efficient video codecs on the way. So it would be fewer than 4 BDs per film – actually, if eight-layer BDs jumped from the prototype stage into our homes, a single disc should be capable to house films like The Ten Commandments (1956) in 2160p (with the current generation of two-layer BDs, the 1080p version had to be spread out over two discs).

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Design View Post

The guy who gave us the Betamax Video, Minidisc and HD DVD is obviously still working there and still missing the point - Learn a lesson already.

Actually, Sony never backed HD DVD, they were always blu[e]. So Blu-ray Disc represents the one time Sony stood on the right side of things (you could've mentioned Memory Stick as another glorious debacle by proprietary format-loving, customer-alienating Sony suckers, though).

I agree about the TV format staying 16:9 being the wrong way to go forward with higher resolutions. In my opinion (and probably mine alone), they should adopt something like 25:9. Apart from the fact that it would finally be wide enough for most any aspect ratio (I could live with Napoleon (1927) still having horizontal black bars), they could market it as a perfect multitasking tool (dual-monitor setups would become obselete) – as Philips already does with their 21:9 TVs to a degree.
Count Alucard is offline  
post #14 of 32 Old 07-22-2012, 05:24 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
New Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Not my info on 4k. It's what the guy on tv said so it must be true smile.gif

There was another format that offered good quality (at the time) but hardly anyone bought it. The old laserdiscs.

Convenience counts for a lot. People prefered to rent from the local video store.

I think the days of content coming on any kind of disc are nearly over. Most of the old video rental infrastructure has already closed down. It's all about downloads. Maybe when the Internet providers catch up it could take off. I could see iTunes offering a 4k option for an extra few dollars.

Too much detail stops movies looking movie-like if you know what I mean. Maybe that's why some people prefer plasma for movies. I wish there was 21:9 panel available. I'd use it over LCD any day.

Does anyone pay the extra to rent / buy the HD version on ITunes? I usually go old school because it downloads faster and uses less room on my computer.
New Design is offline  
post #15 of 32 Old 07-23-2012, 02:38 AM
Newbie
 
haikuginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Design View Post

Does anyone pay the extra to rent / buy the HD version on ITunes? I usually go old school because it downloads faster and uses less room on my computer.

Guilty. I've got a 60Mbps (tested) Internet connection, and the extra quality that I get is absolutely worth every penny.

As far as the TV goes, it'll be a tough sell. At that size, and that price, you're going to be digging into the low end of the projector/anamorphic lens market.

I agree with the others that the people wanting a 21:9 display are NOT going to be the ones using built-in speakers. Heck, if it saved a couple hundred bucks, I'd probably not even put in a TV tuner- just give it a few HDMI and component inputs.
haikuginger is offline  
post #16 of 32 Old 07-23-2012, 04:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 102
The success of a 21:9 TV hang very much on the functionality that the 21:9 TV manufacturers have not tapped into yet: PiP !.

Don't do the mistake of thinking of a 21:9 TV product development as a TV.
Conceptualise it as a Monitor that will equally function as good as a PC monitor as it does as a TV.
Then you more than quadrupled the markets you can offer this to.

If you can make them 4K, you have increased the markets desire for this product "hunderfolds" again, and made it more "future-proof". Provided that you can sell the 4K version far below the price of the 4K 16:9 TV's that are now being released in Asia for around $21000.

4K home media content are some years off still. But 4K movies on Blu-ray will fit on the normal 50GB discs with the new compression codecs that will be released in 2013. (HEVC/H.265). You just need a new BD player.

There are a lot of "stumbling blocks" in making a successful and "desirable" TV product. I suggest You keep an eye on the forum section where the future of TV developments are discussed;
http://www.avsforum.com/f/40/flat-panel-general-new-fp-tech
Particularly the threads; "4k by 2k or Quad HD...lots of rumors? thoughts?" and "OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread".


Here are some mock-ups I made and posted here a looong time ago, to give an impression of the direction you have to go.





coolscan is offline  
post #17 of 32 Old 07-26-2012, 03:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 15,527
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 160
So where does one simply order raw 71" cinemascope panels from?

Best of luck but still sounds very fishy to me, sorry for being skeptical but the last time I read something like this the guy behind it soaked a bunch of investors for a huge amount of $.

Jason

My Twitch Game Stream [PS4/Xone/PC]...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DaGamePimp is online now  
post #18 of 32 Old 07-27-2012, 08:30 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
New Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by haikuginger View Post

Guilty. I've got a 60Mbps (tested) Internet connection, and the extra quality that I get is absolutely worth every penny.
As far as the TV goes, it'll be a tough sell. At that size, and that price, you're going to be digging into the low end of the projector/anamorphic lens market.
I agree with the others that the people wanting a 21:9 display are NOT going to be the ones using built-in speakers. Heck, if it saved a couple hundred bucks, I'd probably not even put in a TV tuner- just give it a few HDMI and component inputs.

I've already decided not to put a TV tuner in. It's not just a cost saving, it's more that I think it's given that most people get TV through cable boxes these days. Well anyone that would buy this.

I've sort of come around to the no speakers thing but the designer wants to show me what he can do on that before I make a decision. I'm probably going to test both options. There is a part of me that can't get my head around selling a high-end TV with no sound capability at all but as the Zen master says "we'll see".
New Design is offline  
post #19 of 32 Old 07-27-2012, 08:52 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
New Design's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaGamePimp View Post

So where does one simply order raw 71" cinemascope panels from?
Best of luck but still sounds very fishy to me, sorry for being skeptical but the last time I read something like this the guy behind it soaked a bunch of investors for a huge amount of $.
Jason

If you don't want to go to Taiwan (which I don't), t he quickest way is to go through somebody who already has a relationship with the panel manufacturer you want to use. There are a ton of companies that sell TV parts but the safest way is to go through one of their named resellers. That information is on their website.

Another way is to go through a contract manufacturer who has a relationship with the panel manufacturer. The number of units you want can have an influence on where you go as well as their design capability. In my case, for my test run, I'm going through a display company that I happen to have a previous business relationship with. Display companies make custom LCD units almost exclusively in the B2B space (business to business because you're in Missouri smile.gif

I chose this route because they typically work with the sort of volumes I am looking for and more importantly, I think their design capability is superior. I sat in what they call "an innovation session" a few days ago and I was blown away with some of the designs they showed me. Granted these were meant to grab your attention as you walk past a retail outlet and not for home but I want a different approach for a different business model.

Much harder, is the enclosures at my volumes which are too small for injection molding at my volumes and the front Bezel is too large for 3D printing, especially as I want it all in one piece. I'm probably going to have to go the brushed aluminum route over plastic because of this.

I know this is nothing to do with you point, but I also saw glasses-free 3D which is amazing and I've sent them away to see if it could work with consumer blu ray formats.
New Design is offline  
post #20 of 32 Old 07-27-2012, 05:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 15,527
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Design View Post

Display companies make custom LCD units almost exclusively in the B2B space (business to business because you're in Missouri smile.gif

While I am not "in Missouri" you're sure to make friends here real quick tossing out degrading remarks like that. Simply adding in 'business to business' would have been enough, no? confused.gif

You have to expect a large number of people to be skeptical when you come into an AV forum and post something like this, your insulting response 'speaks' of your character and as such I know I'll not be interested in any of your displays.

Good luck,

Jason

My Twitch Game Stream [PS4/Xone/PC]...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DaGamePimp is online now  
post #21 of 32 Old 07-28-2012, 03:51 AM
Member
 
Count Alucard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Dude, calm down, he just mistook you for user mtbdudex (his comment) and tried to be funny. Whether he succeeded or not, way to show you ain't got no sense of humor...

New Design, I'd still appreciate your answers in this and the other thread.
Count Alucard is offline  
post #22 of 32 Old 07-28-2012, 06:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,384
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

If you can make them 4K, you have increased the markets desire for this product "hunderfolds" again, and made it more "future-proof". Provided that you can sell the 4K version far below the price of the 4K 16:9 TV's that are now being released in Asia for around $21000.

1K is actually 1024, 2K 2048 etc. These 21:9 displays actually need to be 5K to be 1:1 compatible with true 4K. The true 4K is 4096 x 2160 and therefore a 21:9 TV (at 4K ) will need to actually be (5x 1024) 5120 x 2160.
I personally still fail to see the need for 4K in the home when D-Cinemas (which needs more rez because of the size of the screen) still run 2K and I honestly think that 2560 x 1080 has more to offer than a 4K display in the home where the average screen size is less than 100".

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #23 of 32 Old 07-30-2012, 08:03 AM
 
Aknot5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Is D-Cinema 4K source anamorphic (~2160 vert pixels) or roughly 4096x1750?
Aknot5 is offline  
post #24 of 32 Old 07-30-2012, 09:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

I personally still fail to see the need for 4K in the home when D-Cinemas (which needs more rez because of the size of the screen) still run 2K...

For TVs I agree, but for real HT, ie projected, I greatly look forward to 4K. Most of us sit well within the distance/ratio where 4K would be beneficial. And as for D-Cinema, the last one I went to was very disappointing, though I don't know if it was poor setup or because it was 2K (likely both), I would never point to D-Cinema as the benchmark for picture quality, HT has (been able to) exceeded it for a while now.
Quote:
and I honestly think that 2560 x 1080 has more to offer than a 4K display in the home where the average screen size is less than 100".

I'd rather have 4K (3840x2160) and a lens than 2560x1080.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
stanger89 is offline  
post #25 of 32 Old 07-30-2012, 02:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DaGamePimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: WA State
Posts: 15,527
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Alucard View Post

Dude, calm down, he just mistook you for user mtbdudex (his comment) and tried to be funny. Whether he succeeded or not, way to show you ain't got no sense of humor...
New Design, I'd still appreciate your answers in this and the other thread.

Very calm here confused.gif, while I missed the comment you linked I still see nothing funny in his response, even if it was meant to be a joke it's still insulting with a strong hint of arrogance on the side. We just happen to read people differently, no big deal.

Beyond all that nonsense it will be very interesting to see if this comes to be or if it was all just BS... while I am not interested in the product I am interested in the outcome. If the OP pulls this off I'll be first in line to congratulate him.

Jason

My Twitch Game Stream [PS4/Xone/PC]...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DaGamePimp is online now  
post #26 of 32 Old 07-13-2013, 03:24 PM
Newbie
 
Dantecito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
When I first saw the Philip press conference announcing their 21:9 cinema format and not be sold in the USA,
I was very disappointed. Eventually they caved in because of Vizio announcement.
Now, you are bringing to the table an amazing idea, which I sincerely hope you can bring it to fruition.
I hope to see your idea ( design come to the market ). I will be waiting...Gambatte Kudasai! smile.gif
Dantecito is offline  
post #27 of 32 Old 07-15-2013, 06:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,384
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aknot5 View Post

Is D-Cinema 4K source anamorphic (~2160 vert pixels) or roughly 4096x1750?

I know that ISCO makes a 1.25x A-Lens for the D-Cinema projectors, but I've never seen a D-Cinema projector set up with an A-Lens yet. 8 of the last 10 D-Cinema films I saw were Scope, yet none used an A-Lens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

I'd rather have 4K (3840x2160) and a lens than 2560x1080.

Would be amazing to have.

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #28 of 32 Old 07-16-2013, 01:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolrda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 1,007
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The 4K Sonys that are used at the Edwards(3 theaters equipped)locally use the Isco 1.25x. It a necessity for 4K3D in 2.39 because they need the light. They can show 2D native@4096x1716 pixel matched or at 4096x2160 like they do here with the lens changer. I dig the vertical slide. Now wouldn't a CineSlide Vert be sweet? I'm amazed their doing the same thing we do, 2.39 non anamorphic source with a stretched+A lens playback.

http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/files/mkt/digicinema/brochures/srxr320_di0189c_2.pdf


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

coolrda is offline  
post #29 of 32 Old 07-16-2013, 01:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolrda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 1,007
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

For TVs I agree, but for real HT, ie projected, I greatly look forward to 4K. Most of us sit well within the distance/ratio where 4K would be beneficial. And as for D-Cinema, the last one I went to was very disappointing, though I don't know if it was poor setup or because it was 2K (likely both), I would never point to D-Cinema as the benchmark for picture quality, HT has (been able to) exceeded it for a while now.
I'd rather have 4K (3840x2160) and a lens than 2560x1080.

Absolutely. Having seen every 4k unit in existing over the last 4 years it really is a necessity. Even at 3-4xPH its night and day compared to 1080p. I won't be an early adopter by I will have a real 4K unit someday. And the Sharp 85" 8K is by far, and its not close, the best picture I've ever seen. It overwhelms the senses. I just stood there laughing.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

coolrda is offline  
post #30 of 32 Old 07-17-2013, 08:48 AM
Senior Member
 
sipester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 373
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Design View Post

Hi

I'm starting a new electronics brand and one of the LCD/LED backlit screens I am manufacturing is a 71" 21:9 3D TV .

I would love some input on what you all think.

I am going after a niche market of people whose taste is not catered for by mainstream brands. I look around in electronics stores and everything looks the same. Who decided that all TV's should be rectangular black plastic boxes.

Also, I don't think it's acceptable that TV's come with such poor sound quality that you have to buy a whole new amp and speakers. They all seem to have assumed that we will sacrifice almost everything to get a TV that's just a little bit thinner. The blu ray, cable-box and speakers need floor-space so I don't gain much benefit. Plus I don't want to drill into my living-room wall to hang it.

I think 71" 21:9 TV's are wide enough to hold decent speakers- they could even be used to cover the vertical black bars for 16:9 content and then slide out for 2.35:1 in a similar way to the curtains at the movies when the previews end and the movie begins.

The 58" that Philips and Vizio sell is not quite big enough for me (although they are both cool).

What do you think? are there a bunch of people out there in my niche who prefer chrome to plastic and want a TV that is optimized for movies instead of desperate housewives and with quality surround sound built-in?

I like your enthusiasm, but I think the law of physics and some basic math make your goal unachievable. What I mean is this, you are essentially proposing to provide is 3 things in your TV:

1. The equivalent of a 57" diagonal for 16:9 content
2. A larger, 71" diagonal in a 2.35:1 layout for widescreen content (which, BTW is the same size screen that can be found 75" diagonal 16:9 tv)
3. Better sound than what is in most TV's.

#2 & #3 are basically stating that your goal is a much more immersive experience for movies than what can be had with typical flat screen tv's in a 16:9 format and weak internal speakers.

Again, that's a laudable goal, but there are two much easier ways to achieve that goal than what you have proposed.

Option 1.

A. Get a 60inch 16:9 tv for regular TV viewing.
B. Get a projector and screen for movie watching
C. Get a sound bar (at the least) or a receiver and proper speakers and subwoofer.

With Option 1, you could easily get these the items above in the range of 3K - 5K that would match your 71 inch TV for regular TV viewing and would blow away anything you could do for 2.35:1 content (i.e. easily double the size of screen) and far surpass any kind of sound you could put in a TV box. Unless your projected price is well under 4K, then I don't see why anyone would want to limit themselves to a "small" 71 inch TV and internal speakers for an immersive movie watching experience (the whole point of this section is "immersive" movie watching on a 2.35:1 screen, usually far bigger than 71 inches!)

Option 2

Okay, even if you argue that there is a large market that doesn't want to deal with a projector, receiver, separate speakers, etc., (which likely isn't anyone in this forum section), then someone from that group could just go get one of the 80 inch Vizio or Sharp LCD's and a "good" soundbar. That approach would give someone a TV nearly twice as big for 16:9 content and even a 15% bigger screen for 2.35:1 content (i.e., the equivalent of a 76 inch 2.35:1 ratio TV). Again, unless your projected price is well under 4K, then this would seem to be a better option as well than your solution.

Now if new technology comes on the horizon in the next few years (rollable LED) that allows someone to cheaply manufacturer large TV's (ie. greater than 100") then maybe the immersive experience you seek can be done with a flat planel (and even then, the laws of physics dictate that it's going to be very hard, and very expensive for a few small thin speakers on the sides of the display to match the sound, spaciousness, and imaging of separate larger speakers driven by an amp/receiver with sub(s)). Until then, a projector and a screen will always win out for the immersive movie experience (which is why I have a plasma for daytime TV viewing and a projector with a drop-down screen for movies, and I never use the TV speakers).
sipester is offline  
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off