AVS Forum

AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   LCD Flat Panel Displays (http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/)
-   -   Samsung 85HU8550 is FALD according to HD Guru. Can that be True? (http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/1611569-samsung-85hu8550-fald-according-hd-guru-can-true.html)

Citivas 07-21-2014 07:43 AM

Samsung 85HU8550 is FALD according to HD Guru. Can that be True?
 
This is on the HDGuru site of of yesterday:

"Check out the debut of Samsung’s 85-inch flat screen UHD 4K model. Unlike the smaller Samsung HU8550 screens which are edge-lit, the UN85HU8550 (according to our sources), uses direct LED backlights with local dimming. This puts it up against the soon to be released $25,000 Sony XBR85X950B."

Any way to confirm or debunk this? That seems like a major development if true. That would make it an 85" FALD for over $10K. Seems too good to be true.

shoek 07-21-2014 12:33 PM

I tried to get the reviewer, Robert Heron, to clarify that comment... but nothing so far. Before edge lit LED LCD's, weren't the backlights behind the screen in the LCD's of 10 years ago? Could it bet that?

Citivas 07-21-2014 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoek (Post 25923345)
I tried to get the reviewer, Robert Heron, to clarify that comment... but nothing so far. Before edge lit LED LCD's, weren't the backlights behind the screen in the LCD's of 10 years ago? Could it bet that?

The reviewer just posted on Twitter that the information comes "straight from the manufacture."

That of course still leaves open the (strong) possibility that the Samsung rep misspoke or he mis-heard. But he at least knows enough to clearly understand the difference between edge-lit and FALD and clearly understood all the terminology in is 55" review to know the traditional ways Samsung refers to its edge-lit displays as "local dimming" etc.

8mile13 07-21-2014 01:09 PM

HD guru gets info from some folks high up in the Samsung chain. The info is not always solid. For instance HD guru claimed in january 2013 that the Samsung UN85S9 was an Egde Lit with Local Dimming while in fact the S9 is a FALD.


Samsung 4K UN85S9 FALD $40,000
Samsung 4K UN85HU8550 ???? $9,999

Citivas 07-21-2014 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 8mile13 (Post 25924473)
HD guru gets info from some folks high up in the Samsung chain. The info is not always solid. For instance HD guru claimed in january 2013 that the Samsung UN85S9 was an Egde Lit with Local Dimming while in fact the S9 is a FALD.


Samsung UN85S9 FALD $40,000
Samsung UN85HU8550 ???? $9,999

Exactly. The price difference would instantly make the S9 the most expensive paperweight ever from a sales perspective, especially since it's already outdated in terms of connections, codecs, etc.

I presume the market Samsung and Sony had for their $25-40K FALD sets was tiny. I could see logic in them deciding to go for a bigger consumer market with a dramatically lower price if they could make the set cheap enough to still have a margin. But I can't get them doing to without major fanfare and by quietly tacking it onto a model-line that is otherwise edge-lit and doesn't even have their best features for handling blacks and contrast. The only possible explantations were it true is either that they are about to discontinue toe S( and name this the successor or that they sourced some panel that happened to have FALD -- can't be that many 85" 4K panel options around.

More likely someone from Samsung is getting their facts wrong, most likely because (LOL) they are confused by their own marketing terminology.

Citivas 07-21-2014 01:40 PM

That said, (allegedly) JVC is releasing an 85" panel this year with 64 FALD zones for $8K (JVC DM85USR). Did a search on it here at AVS and can't really find anything but there are multiple announcement articles for it and all site the supposed direct light local dimming and 64 zones. Another mistake?

westa6969 07-21-2014 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citivas (Post 25925281)
That said, (allegedly) JVC is releasing an 85" panel this year with 64 FALD zones for $8K (JVC DM85USR). Did a search on it here at AVS and can't really find anything but there are multiple announcement articles for it and all site the supposed direct light local dimming and 64 zones. Another mistake?

Does make one wonder considering JVC contracts it's panels and then tweaks them with their own electronics. However, JVC is no longer truly JVC - the name was licensed to a Taiwan Electronics Company called Amtran and they have a subsidiary in the US and so they are JVC in name but not truly the JVC of old. The problem is that back in Jan at CES they promised the moon and little has materialized.

It does seem a tough sell they are producing an 85" 4K with FALD for just $8K-$10K. Likely a misinterpretaion of Samsungs marketing lingo.:)

Citivas 07-21-2014 04:21 PM

I just returned from another BB visit and spend more time with the 85HU8550 as well as the 65X950B, 79X900B and the 65HU9000. I brought along my Spears & Munsil disc, we also tried The Dark Knight blu-ray on most of them (expect the 900B), the third Narnia film in 3D (only only the 8550), a live DirecTV feed and the demo reels for each set.

I don't feel I definitely answered the question. But I am going to vote edge-lit. The thing is there were no obvious issues that made that assessment a slam dunk which speaks to the quality of the panel I saw even if edge-lit. The uniformity was truly great. There was no clouding or flashlighting at all. It was only when we put on a grey screen and a check board of grey and white that I could discern a very, very small amount of light bleed from the lower right quadrant. It was subtle. Not something you'd see in normal use at all.

The black level was also okay but not truly great. Not in the same league as the 950B and a bit worse than the HU9000 but not a lot. It may have been on-par with the 79X900B, which doesn't match the black level of the smaller screens in that model.

The most tale tell sign of edge lighting I saw was when I ran the motion test from the S&M disc that scrolls their logo repeatedly across the screen. On the 950B it showed no discernible halo or blooming at all. On the HU9000 is had a bit of a halo but it was pretty localized. On the 8550 the entire space to either side of the logo was a tad lighter than above or below it, from screen edge to screen edge.

On the other hand, as I said, it took a lot of work to find an obvious sign of edge-lighting. In normal programming, playing The Dark Knight, I couldn't tell at all. In fact, with the HU9000 if I viewed off-angle I could see a bit of lighter shaded vertical banding about a third of the way across the set whereas I didn't notice any problem off angle with the 8550. This could have been an effect of the curve in the screen, but it seemed like I was seeing some light bleed with the HU9000.

It is possible, I suppose, that if Samsung slapped a FALD panel with their standard 8550 firmware and chips that it might show some of the imperfections I noted. But my gut is on edge-lit. Very, very good edge-lit. Enough that I am now adding this set to my short-list.

kamenoff 07-26-2014 06:58 PM

http://www.bestbigscreentvreviews.co...hu8550-review/

Ken Ross 07-26-2014 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kamenoff (Post 26067226)

Weird, their chart shows the Samsung as having an IPS panel. I wonder if that's a typo? You wouldn't expect them to rave about the black levels if that was the case.

Citivas 07-26-2014 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Ross (Post 26068794)
Weird, their chart shows the Samsung as having an IPS panel. I wonder if that's a typo? You wouldn't expect them to rave about the black levels if that was the case.

Seems like just a mistake. They don't list the panel for the LG in the chart yet the review goes into detail about the lG having an IPS panel and says nothing about the Samsung panel. I think the reviewer just filled in the wrong side of the chart.

I read this review a week or so ago and re-read it just now and I am skeptical it is a real hands-on review. It's an amateur user submission without a real name. Yes it is written as if it is but it seems like they are mostly regurgitating general information already out their about both sets. They say you can click on a link for more detailed reviews of each, but that link just takes you to the same page, and the only links that take you to "more details" on each is just re-directs to their Amazon.com pages. I wouldn't be surprised if the reviewer faked it. In fact, I would be surprised if they didn't.

8mile13 07-27-2014 07:48 AM

C|NET is often best informed. They say the 85HU8550 is a Edge Lit Local Dimming
http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-rel...eat-and-small/

Citivas 07-27-2014 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 8mile13 (Post 26074890)
C|NET is often best informed. They say the 85HU8550 is a Edge Lit Local Dimming
http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-rel...eat-and-small/

This was published a month ago and is just a regurgitation of the press release and where they may have just assumed it copied the specs of the rest of the series, as it does on the website. I don't think this constitutes CNet having officially asked Samsung to clarify whether it is edge-lit or direct-lit. Actually, I emailed and tweeted the CNet TV reviewers last Monday after this new rumor (or "scoop" if you believe HD Guru who is sticking by the story and says Samsung has officially confirmed it) first circulated, asking them to formally ask Samsung for a denial or confirmation of the rumor. They haven't responded or published anything since.

Basically anything that was published before last Monday is not really going to address the issue. I have probably read it all -- did quite a bit of scouring the Google results on it -- and it all either just relying on the Samsung spec page which is the same for the entire model line and came out well before the actual set did (and Samsung has often been wrong on it's website), or they are making assumptions based on the smaller model specs.

BTW, someone pointed out on one of the other topics that the 85" panel is over twice as thick as the smaller panels, often a tell tale sign of direct lit.

Again, I am not pushing this theory, just looking at what comes in objectively until the issue is definitively answered. From what I saw in-person, if it is direct-lit it is not doing a better job with black levels or perceived light bleed than the best edge-lit sets (which is still pretty great since they do a fine job) so it may be a moot point in terms of the result on the picture. But I'd still like to know.

** I used the word "perceived" before light bleed, because the only real effect I saw which was not as good as on the X950 or the HU900 was when I used the scrolling Spears & Munsil test slide and the icon's motion created a horizontal zone of slightly lighter black from edge to edge. When I think about this more, that could be edge-lighting at work or it could just be inferior handling of motion (which might also have been a setting) and how quickly it dims the LCD's. Since it scrolls pretty fast it may have in effect created a "halo" band. Honestly, I have no idea. Just talking it out. Net result, the 950B and the HU9000 performed better on this test but overall the 85Hu8550 looked awesome playing real content.

8mile13 07-27-2014 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citivas (Post 26075010)
This was published a month ago and is just a regurgitation of the press release and where they may have just assumed it copied the specs of the rest of the series, as it does on the website. I don't think this constitutes CNet having officially asked Samsung to clarify whether it is edge-lit or direct-lit. Actually, I emailed and tweeted the CNet TV reviewers last Monday after this new rumor (or "scoop" if you believe HD Guru who is sticking by the story and says Samsung has officially confirmed it) first circulated, asking them to formally ask Samsung for a denial or confirmation of the rumor. They haven't responded or published anything since.

Basically anything that was published before last Monday is not really going to address the issue. I have probably read it all -- did quite a bit of scouring the Google results on it -- and it all either just relying on the Samsung spec page which is the same for the entire model line and came out well before the actual set did (and Samsung has often been wrong on it's website), or they are making assumptions based on the smaller model specs.

BTW, someone pointed out on one of the other topics that the 85" panel is over twice as thick as the smaller panels, often a tell tale sign of direct lit.

Again, I am not pushing this theory, just looking at what comes in objectively until the issue is definitively answered. From what I saw in-person, if it is direct-lit it is not doing a better job with black levels or perceived light bleed than the best edge-lit sets (which is still pretty great since they do a fine job) so it may be a moot point in terms of the result on the picture. But I'd still like to know.

** I used the word "perceived" before light bleed, because the only real effect I saw which was not as good as on the X950 or the HU900 was when I used the scrolling Spears & Munsil test slide and the icon's motion created a horizontal zone of slightly lighter black from edge to edge. When I think about this more, that could be edge-lighting at work or it could just be inferior handling of motion (which might also have been a setting) and how quickly it dims the LCD's. Since it scrolls pretty fast it may have in effect created a "halo" band. Honestly, I have no idea. Just talking it out. Net result, the 950B and the HU9000 performed better on this test but overall the 85Hu8550 looked awesome playing real content.

I was talking about the hdguru S9 mistake. C|NET was pretty quick with its S9 review and they were right about it being a FALD while a few other sites were wrong..



david(dallas) 07-27-2014 04:04 PM

3 Attachment(s)
no its not, saw one today at plano,tx bb.. also talked to a sammy rep there. its edge light...

BUTit did look great. it was playing the NFL network, the first time i have ever seen a sammy4k play anything other than 4k matterial

Citivas 07-27-2014 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by david(dallas) (Post 26084546)
no its not, saw one today at plano,tx bb.. also talked to a sammy rep there. its edge light...

BUTit did look great. it was playing the NFL network, the first time i have ever seen a sammy4k play anything other than 4k matterial

Again, not to belabor the point, but the BB people would have no idea. They just go off the specs on the public website like everyone else. The second time I saw it in-person at my local BB I asked them if it was edge-lit, they said yes, definitely. I then showed them to post from HD Guru then we ran the test slides together and after that they said they now thought it was FALD. They don't have any insider information.

The crux of what HD Guru said is that a senior Samsung person has told them it is direct lit despite the fact that it says edge-lit on the specs. They were challenged on this and went back to Samsung again who they claim officially confirmed it to them. Additionally, the extra depth of the panel versus all the smaller sizes could demonstrate this.

So to counter it you can't go to the market department website or any of the reviews where were all up before this new claim. You need a reasonable senior (not customer service or sales force) Samsung exec to either officially confirm or deny it. Something hopefully CNet or another connected site our outlet will eventually do.

Citivas 07-27-2014 04:22 PM

Even if it turns out to be direct-lit with some local dimming, BTW (thus generally FALD), not all FALD is created equal. What I saw running the tests had better uniformity than any of the edge-lit sets I have tested it with -- including the HU9000 -- but it did not result in a better overall black level than the HU9000 which seemed to have superior local dimming when running the torture test of the scrolling logo rapidly across a black screen. With the HU9000 however I could see some light bleed banding off-angle, something I needed see testing the same material at the same angle on the HU8550.

david(dallas) 07-27-2014 04:27 PM

3 Attachment(s)
READ my post closer, I talked to a Samsung Rep at best buy!!!! so maybe the samsung rep is wrong..

Citivas 07-27-2014 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by david(dallas) (Post 26085066)
READ my post closer, I talked to a Samsung Rep at best buy!!!! so maybe the samsung rep is wrong..

Yes, that was my point. The retail store reps are junior level sales people. Their level of insier info is not much different than customer service. I have spoken to Sony and Samsung reps before that didn't know half as much about their products and we do here.

We need someone further up the food chain to confirm or deny this. Someone with access to the specifics of the parts used, and not just someone who's memorized the spec sheet and sales training camp.

david(dallas) 08-02-2014 02:52 PM

3 Attachment(s)
Anybody have an update here yet. I saw one in person and it is 1 thicker than the 75, not not as thick as the Sony 85 950b.

Citivas 08-02-2014 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by david(dallas) (Post 26244969)
Anybody have an update here yet. I saw one in person and it is 1 thicker than the 75, not not as thick as the Sony 85 950b.

No, no answer yet. Some people have pointed out that in-store Samsung reps at BB, etc. have said edge-lit but they really wouldn't know. Similarly, the spec on the Samsung website is edge-lit but it's been up for months and is the same regardless of size.

There's been no independent confirmation or denial from Samsung Corporate nor has anyone opened one of these sets to see for themselves. Short of one of those facts, I don't think we'll have a definitive answer. Sooner or later some reviewer or insider with access to Samsung Corporate will get a definitely answer.

fafrd 08-02-2014 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citivas (Post 25925281)
That said, (allegedly) JVC is releasing an 85" panel this year with 64 FALD zones for $8K (JVC DM85USR). Did a search on it here at AVS and can't really find anything but there are multiple announcement articles for it and all site the supposed direct light local dimming and 64 zones. Another mistake?

Very believable. Direct-lit generally implies fewer LEDs on the backlight and so inherently less ability to support a large number of dimming zones. 64 zones is a small enough number that I can believe it could be supported with a direct-lit backlight.


Maybe it's time to introduce 'DLLD' as opposed to 'FALD' :-)

Citivas 08-02-2014 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fafrd (Post 26247961)
Very believable. Direct-lit generally implies fewer LEDs on the backlight and so inherently less ability to support a large number of dimming zones. 64 zones is a small enough number that I can believe it could be supported with a direct-lit backlight.


Maybe it's time to introduce 'DLLD' as opposed to 'FALD' :-)

Some people seem to feel FALD should only apply if the number of local dimming zones passes some unnamed threshold. Perhaps, but what is the magic number? To me it should be more simple. The original differentiation of "direct lit" actually referred to rather low-end sets that had a small quantity of physical LED's behind for lighting but no meaningful local dimming. If it has true backlighting AND local dimming, for better or worse and barring some official zone count definition I have never seen, it should be called FALD.

But to each their own.

Cleveland Plasma 08-04-2014 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citivas (Post 25925281)
That said, (allegedly) JVC is releasing an 85" panel this year with 64 FALD zones for $8K (JVC DM85USR). Did a search on it here at AVS and can't really find anything but there are multiple announcement articles for it and all site the supposed direct light local dimming and 64 zones. Another mistake?

It would be a mistake to think that 64 zones on a 85" unit would be a huge win. I guess you could call it FALD. I would not expect this unit to be a rock star, but I guess we will see.

UN85HU8550 may be a cross breed of FALD, but nothing like the Elite LED's and the older XBR FALD units.

There are so many play on words with FALD, its pretty sad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citivas (Post 26084994)
BTW (thus generally FALD), not all FALD is created equal.

Yep, no question about that.

Citivas 08-04-2014 05:57 PM

Yet we live in an age where so many on this forum have been hailing the new Vizio's as the second coming with as few as 16 FALD zones. Even the P-Series 4K models which aren't even out yet only have 64-zones. Only the phantom R-series which may or may not show up and who knows at what price point has triple-digit FALD zones within the Vizio line.

True, no competition for the X950B or S9 -- though neither company disclosed their zone count -- but since even the 32 zone M-series has been getting decent PQ reviews, it's not worth being dismissive of even basic FALD.

Citivas 08-11-2014 09:57 AM

Latest from HD Guru. They have edited the link from their site to Amazon's product page for the 85" 8550 with the following:

"Retail $12000 Now $9997.99 Amazon direct -Note: This is a full array LED backlit model with local dimming, not edge-lit as stated by Amazon"

6athome 08-11-2014 02:05 PM

I contacted Samsung and they said it was FALD.
I didn't get an answer about the panel being 10 bit.
85 inch 8550

Citivas 08-11-2014 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6athome (Post 26478393)
I contacted Samsung and they said it was FALD.
I didn't get an answer about the panel being 10 bit.
85 inch 8550

Can you elaborate on how and who you contacted (not a name necessarily but position)?

6athome 08-12-2014 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citivas (Post 26478953)
Can you elaborate on how and who you contacted (not a name necessarily but position)?

Sorry it took so long to answer you,I was on a internet chat with Samsung Rep, he looked it up for me.

Cleveland Plasma 08-12-2014 09:26 AM

I would never put in writing that the UN85HU8550 is FALD, why ? Cause I will not be taking a return because of it ;)

Believe what you like, however there is no way this set is FALD, if it was it would be listed different like UN85HU9500, not to mention the price would be at least $5000 more.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.