QLED Forum in Beijing: Samsung, TCL, HiSense Join QLED TV Alliance - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 55Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 07:16 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 12,289
Mentioned: 271 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6485 Post(s)
Liked: 11236
QLED Forum in Beijing: Samsung, TCL, HiSense Join QLED TV Alliance

QLED the product category? My threshold was simple, if other companies joined Samsung in using QLED as an umbrella term for any TV that uses Quantum Dots and LEDs then it would be so. Well, now it is so.

Click the link to read more: http://www.avsforum.com/qled-tv-alli...g-tcl-hisense/


Here's a pretty picture to go with this post.
3dprojector and King Richard like this.

Mark Henninger, Senior Editor at AVS Forum
imagic is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 08:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
3dprojector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 532
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 201 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Samsung is putting all the bets in Qled basket!

Last edited by 3dprojector; 04-14-2017 at 08:03 AM.
3dprojector is online now  
post #3 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 08:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 680
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked: 217
i think the technology is at this point clearly 2nd tier...hype or a challenge to oled :to be determined
Lp85253 is offline  
 
post #4 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 08:34 AM
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,567
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2104 Post(s)
Liked: 1519
So
LCD<Edgelit QLED<OLED<FALD QLED<PL-QLED<EL-QLED?

The only FALD QLEDs are:
Hisense 70H10D
Hisense 75H10D
TCL X1 XESS
Sharp 70SU9500U
Sharp 75SU9500U
UMAX 85Q

One is only available in China and the rest might turn into Vaporware.
marco_silva85 likes this.
sytech is offline  
post #5 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 08:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,785
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1375 Post(s)
Liked: 697
If it was two weeks earlier - I would have thought this was an April Fools' joke...
vardo, bluemoon737 and Lp85253 like this.
New24K is offline  
post #6 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 09:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BFJ 96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,792
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
So
LCD<Edgelit QLED<OLED<FALD QLED<PL-QLED<EL-QLED?

The only FALD QLEDs are:
Hisense 70H10D
Hisense 75H10D
TCL X1 XESS
Sharp 70SU9500U
Sharp 75SU9500U
UMAX 85Q

One is only available in China and the rest might turn into Vaporware.
Don't forget the SHARP 65N9000U

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Last edited by BFJ 96; 04-14-2017 at 11:46 AM.
BFJ 96 is online now  
post #7 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 10:13 AM
Member
 
MilesSouth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
So
LCD<Edgelit QLED<OLED<FALD QLED<PL-QLED<EL-QLED?

The only FALD QLEDs are:
Hisense 70H10D
Hisense 75H10D
TCL X1 XESS
Sharp 70SU9500U
Sharp 75SU9500U
UMAX 85Q

One is only available in China and the rest might turn into Vaporware.
I was going to ask, how many of these are available to buy in the US?
Lp85253 likes this.
MilesSouth is offline  
post #8 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 10:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 4,835
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1491 Post(s)
Liked: 981
5 years ago OLED looked dead in the water. Give QLED some time to mature before writing it off.
KidHorn is offline  
post #9 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 10:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
Datagg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: AZ
Posts: 510
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 75
This cracks me up..So essentially anyone can make a "new" class, get a few top dogs to join and it becomes an alliance. This is marketing at its worst, completely by design meant to confuse the masses. Sad!!
Datagg is online now  
post #10 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 11:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
6athome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked: 156
True QLED is coming, self emitting LED Quantum Dots, is a year or two off. Look at the new 10.5 and 11 generation LCD plants being built by the Chinese, it's not that far off.
6athome is offline  
post #11 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 11:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fatuglyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 747

desktop + headphone Sonus faber Toy monitor|REL T Zero|Sony UDA-1|Sony MDR-Z7|Sony MDR-1000X|Audioquest NightHawk|Ultimate Ears Triple.fi 10|Sony NW-A35
ht Sony A1E 65" OLED|Monitor Audio Silver RX6, RX Centre, RX1|SVS SB-2000|Sony STR-ZA5000ES|Sony UBP-X1000ES|Sonos Connect + Peachtree Audio DAC•iT|Panamax M-5100PM
stereo Sonus faber Toy tower|REL S/5|Teac UD-501|Sony TA-A1ES|Sony SCD-777ES|Sony ST-SA50ES|Sony 43" X800D|Sony UBP-X800|Sonos Connect|Furman Elite-15 PFi
fatuglyguy is online now  
post #12 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 12:34 PM
Member
 
babator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Hisense ULED marketing material is at least easy to change ULED -> QLED. So on the positive side, perhaps there will be one less marketing acronym.
King Richard likes this.
babator is offline  
post #13 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 12:51 PM
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,567
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2104 Post(s)
Liked: 1519
Quote:
Originally Posted by BFJ 96 View Post
Don't forget the SHARP 65N9000U

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

That is actually a 2015 model that is using 1st Gen Nanosys QDEF. Just like its twin the Hisense 65H10C.
sytech is offline  
post #14 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 04:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,373
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1726 Post(s)
Liked: 1008
There are actually lots of alliances. Here is one of them..
http://www.giraffealliance.org/
8mile13 is offline  
post #15 of 58 Old 04-14-2017, 05:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,022
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 975 Post(s)
Liked: 815
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
So
LCD<Edgelit QLED<OLED<FALD QLED<PL-QLED<EL-QLED

The only FALD QLEDs are:
Hisense 70H10D
Hisense 75H10D
TCL X1 XESS
Sharp 70SU9500U
Sharp 75SU9500U
UMAX 85Q

One is only available in China and the rest might turn into Vaporware.
Technically, current edge-lit and FALD QLED's are LCD's. So, whether you favor a FALD QLED or an OLED depends on whether you value high luminance and color volume over absolute black, infinite contrast, and pixel level control.

I think most here would rank them as follows: edge-lit LED-LCD<edge-lit QD LED-LCD<FALD LED-LCD<FALD QD LED-LCD<edge-lit PL-QD LED-LCD<FALD PL-QD LED-LCD=OLED<EL QLED
marco_silva85 likes this.
HockeyoAJB is offline  
post #16 of 58 Old 04-15-2017, 07:10 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 12,289
Mentioned: 271 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6485 Post(s)
Liked: 11236
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB View Post
Technically, current edge-lit and FALD QLED's are LCD's. So, whether you favor a FALD QLED or an OLED depends on whether you value high luminance and color volume over absolute black, infinite contrast, and pixel level control.

I think most here would rank them as follows: edge-lit LED-LCD<edge-lit QD LED-LCD<FALD LED-LCD<FALD QD LED-LCD<edge-lit PL-QD LED-LCD<FALD PL-QD LED-LCD=OLED<EL QLED
Every human on planet Earth who can understand what that string of letters means probably does agree with that ranking, but it need be said they'd still be making generalizations based on how a bunch of acronyms fit into a sentence, instead of talking about actual TVs (some of which do not exist).

So, technically there are problems because predicting the future can be a bit tough. Some folks thought plasma had a future before the rug was totally yanked out from under that tech.

Oh and my ideal display? LED. No qualifiers. Just give me direct-emitting RGB LEDs at sufficient density and I'm happy.
AnotherDude likes this.

Mark Henninger, Senior Editor at AVS Forum

Last edited by imagic; 04-15-2017 at 07:44 AM.
imagic is offline  
post #17 of 58 Old 04-15-2017, 02:49 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 13
the only major problem with current qled from a regular consumer is viewing angle, and that will probably be solved next year with photo immisive, sony and other companies, will probably crack and start using those qled panels, and then will have Z series with moth eye and quantum dots.
4Kbeyond is offline  
post #18 of 58 Old 04-15-2017, 05:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 4,183
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 868 Post(s)
Liked: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Every human on planet Earth who can understand what that string of letters means probably does agree with that ranking, but it need be said they'd still be making generalizations based on how a bunch of acronyms fit into a sentence, instead of talking about actual TVs (some of which do not exist).
And the generalizations are based on a small number of fundamental differences in how the light is produced -- the classification is probably oversimplified. I also vote for talking about actual TVs with actual firmware versions. As I recall, Rtings reported that Samsung technicians said some current problems would be dealt with in future firmware releases.

How could firmware changes improve brightness or black levels? I have no idea. All the same, version #1015.1 for some of the Q series does seem to have produced some better performance.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #19 of 58 Old 04-15-2017, 06:40 PM
Member
 
gkdiamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
There are actually lots of alliances. Here is one of them..
http://www.giraffealliance.org/
Judging by the 4th picture down they must have used a camera with a QLED sensor because the colors are so vivid and with bright highlights.
gkdiamond is offline  
post #20 of 58 Old 04-15-2017, 07:31 PM
Member
 
MilesSouth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
There are actually lots of alliances. Here is one of them..
http://www.giraffealliance.org/
This seems like an alliance for a good cause that's not spearheaded by one company to trick customers with deceptive marketing and disguise the absence of any substantive innovation.
fatuglyguy likes this.
MilesSouth is offline  
post #21 of 58 Old 04-16-2017, 03:46 PM
Senior Member
 
Masterbrew2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 489
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
QLED the product category? My threshold was simple, if other companies joined Samsung in using QLED as an umbrella term for any TV that uses Quantum Dots and LEDs then it would be so. Well, now it is so.



Here's a pretty picture to go with this post.
I think the press should be on the consumers side in fighting against these endless and confusing new marketing terms they come up with every year. Letting it slide because 2-3 companies form an alliance seems a bit easy.
gorman42 likes this.

LG 55EA970 OLED
LG OLED65C6P
Masterbrew2 is offline  
post #22 of 58 Old 04-16-2017, 03:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alexanderg823's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,708
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2410 Post(s)
Liked: 1921
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatuglyguy View Post
Lol. Couldn't have said it better myself.
alexanderg823 is online now  
post #23 of 58 Old 04-16-2017, 08:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,409
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1749 Post(s)
Liked: 1672
i really want to stay positive and look at the improvements for what they are, i do...

but, there's apparently already 3 million ppl doing that, so i'll stick to what concerns me.

Q1: have they fixed screen uniformity issues? if not, then this is as useful as figuring out how to double the horsepower on your car that still doesn't have any wheels... i will trade every bit of brightness for a screen that looks solid black and solid white. apparently i'm the most sensitive person in the world to screen uniformity, because literally 80%(ok, i'm making up a number, but every edgelit display i've ever seen) of tv's on the market are unwatchable to me. i don't know how they pass standards, scratched up screens are less distracting.

Q2: is there actually a chance that quantum dots will be used to make an emissive display? that sounds interesting if true. it certainly appears that emissive displays have some huge benefits over transmissive ones by design. if we can combine the function of an emissive display with the ease of led's, there's a lot of potential there

Q3: why can't we just stop torturing our displays with static logos and ticker bars that can EASILY be fixed to prevent burn-in/IR issues. i mean CRT suffered from some pretty bad burn in, but nobody seemed to care because we didn't have these brutal designs for games and tv shows(because people wouldn't watch or play content that did harm to their tv's). i just think it's a shame we have to worry about burn-in, and it's being blamed on the display instead of the content(which imo, is the real problem)

Q4: what can't the industry reveal these shameless marketing gimmicks for what they are? seems like the tech reviewers are some of the only people that will politely 'question' whether something is worthy of a new category or not. manufacturers should be embarrassed to try and trick consumers into thinking this is a brand new tech with completely different pros and cons. i understand that companies want to market their product, and they are driven by sales, and let's face it, 10 million spent on advertising will create more of a return than 10million spent on r&d. but that's where the reviewers need to step in, imo. if a product is unable to back up those claims, rip into it! i'm tired of reading positive reviews for terrible products. I've seen the tv's on the market, they aren't all that good, many are downright terrible. seems like reviewers are concerned that if they don't give 'fair'(my polite way of saying more positive than they deserve) reviews, manufacturers will stop sending them demos. but that's so backwards! i'd much rather read a reviewer that said 'panasamsony refused to send me a demo unit. this leads me to question the performance of their display since the last one did not receive a good review'... manufacturers should be trying to prove their tv's value, seems like reviewers are trying to prove their value to manufacturers instead.
bottom line, THIS implementation of 'qled' is a joke and not worthy of it's own classification. there's no shame in calling them out on it, in fact i'd have a lot more respect for any reviewer who does. at least give an explanation of how the pros/cons are drastically different to warrant a new classification.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC(Enby), PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #24 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 05:10 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 12,289
Mentioned: 271 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6485 Post(s)
Liked: 11236
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
i really want to stay positive and look at the improvements for what they are, i do...

but, there's apparently already 3 million ppl doing that, so i'll stick to what concerns me.

Q1: have they fixed screen uniformity issues? if not, then this is as useful as figuring out how to double the horsepower on your car that still doesn't have any wheels... i will trade every bit of brightness for a screen that looks solid black and solid white. apparently i'm the most sensitive person in the world to screen uniformity, because literally 80%(ok, i'm making up a number, but every edgelit display i've ever seen) of tv's on the market are unwatchable to me. i don't know how they pass standards, scratched up screens are less distracting.

Q2: is there actually a chance that quantum dots will be used to make an emissive display? that sounds interesting if true. it certainly appears that emissive displays have some huge benefits over transmissive ones by design. if we can combine the function of an emissive display with the ease of led's, there's a lot of potential there

Q3: why can't we just stop torturing our displays with static logos and ticker bars that can EASILY be fixed to prevent burn-in/IR issues. i mean CRT suffered from some pretty bad burn in, but nobody seemed to care because we didn't have these brutal designs for games and tv shows(because people wouldn't watch or play content that did harm to their tv's). i just think it's a shame we have to worry about burn-in, and it's being blamed on the display instead of the content(which imo, is the real problem)

Q4: what can't the industry reveal these shameless marketing gimmicks for what they are? seems like the tech reviewers are some of the only people that will politely 'question' whether something is worthy of a new category or not. manufacturers should be embarrassed to try and trick consumers into thinking this is a brand new tech with completely different pros and cons. i understand that companies want to market their product, and they are driven by sales, and let's face it, 10 million spent on advertising will create more of a return than 10million spent on r&d. but that's where the reviewers need to step in, imo. if a product is unable to back up those claims, rip into it! i'm tired of reading positive reviews for terrible products. I've seen the tv's on the market, they aren't all that good, many are downright terrible. seems like reviewers are concerned that if they don't give 'fair'(my polite way of saying more positive than they deserve) reviews, manufacturers will stop sending them demos. but that's so backwards! i'd much rather read a reviewer that said 'panasamsony refused to send me a demo unit. this leads me to question the performance of their display since the last one did not receive a good review'... manufacturers should be trying to prove their tv's value, seems like reviewers are trying to prove their value to manufacturers instead.
bottom line, THIS implementation of 'qled' is a joke and not worthy of it's own classification. there's no shame in calling them out on it, in fact i'd have a lot more respect for any reviewer who does. at least give an explanation of how the pros/cons are drastically different to warrant a new classification.
1. The Q9F has great uniformity, LCDs have gotten much better in that regard in just a few short years.

2. Yes quantum dots will eventually be self-emissive. I've seen 'em glow, it's only a matter of time before that capability is developed into a TV.

3. You cannot get all the world's networks and producers to stop using static elements. And even if you did there would still be issues with letterbox movies. The best bet is to build a display that does not have image retention issues.

4. Do you really expect me to look at a great TV like the Q9F and say it sucks? Not gonna happen. It's sad there are some folks who feel the need to be so negative. Not sure if maybe they are using TVs to project some other issue they actually care about. My only advice to folks who are champing at the bit for some take-down of QLED, all I can suggest is... don't read my reviews.

QLED may be a marketing term that Samsung bought, but at the end of the day Samsung can do with it as it wishes because, well you know.... capitalism and all that.

The strategy I see is that when Samsung finally produces an emissive QD TV, it will have already established the popularity of the QLED term. That's the value in making that transition now. Personally, I'd be happy if all the QLED Debbie Downers would go complain about something else, like how their drive-thru hamburger does not live up to the promise of what they saw in a TV ad.

A metaphor for all marketing. Some folks get mad when they see a picture like this. Others become hungry.

Mark Henninger, Senior Editor at AVS Forum

Last edited by imagic; 04-17-2017 at 05:31 AM.
imagic is offline  
post #25 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 11:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,927
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1261 Post(s)
Liked: 911
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

The strategy I see is that when Samsung finally produces an emissive QD TV, it will have already established the popularity of the QLED term. That's the value in making that transition now. Personally, I'd be happy if all the QLED Debbie Downers would go complain about something else, like how their drive-thru hamburger does not live up to the promise of what they saw in a TV ad.

A metaphor for all marketing. Some folks get mad when they see a picture like this. Others become hungry.
The downside to using 'QLED' now, and allowing other brands to use it, is that it has the potential to dilute/degrade the 'premium' cachet that Samsung is trying to build up with it.

The Q9 may look great, but it's so expensive it's not going to be a high volume seller. More people are going to be buying Q7s, which have been receiving pretty lackluster reviews. Then add Hisense and TCL selling QLED TVs at price points that will doubtless be even lower than Samsung's, and the term starts to become worthless.

When Samsung does finally release an emissive QLED display how are they going to differentiate it in the market from Chinese brands selling 65" edge-lit QLED TVs for $599 or convince people that bought into QLED with a severely compromised product like the Q7 that these new QLEDs are a different type of QLED?

It seems like Samsung is being a bit shortsighted, trying to grab sales with a big marketing push now without much thought as to how that's going to hinder them when real emissive quantum dot displays come out later.

HT: Sony 940C, Oppo 203, Harman/Kardon DPR1001, Infinity Interlude IL40 x2, Infinity Interlude IL36C, Infinity MS-1 ii x2, Infinity MSW-1
Computer: Elac Uni-Fi UB5 x2, Elac Element EA101EQ integrated amp, SVS SB-12NSD
Dedicated 2-channel: Infinity Intermezzo 4.1t towers, Bluesound Node 2, Emotiva PT-100, Crown XLS 1502, Furman PL-8C
TuteTibiImperes is online now  
post #26 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 11:12 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 12,289
Mentioned: 271 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6485 Post(s)
Liked: 11236
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuteTibiImperes View Post
The downside to using 'QLED' now, and allowing other brands to use it, is that it has the potential to dilute/degrade the 'premium' cachet that Samsung is trying to build up with it.

The Q9 may look great, but it's so expensive it's not going to be a high volume seller. More people are going to be buying Q7s, which have been receiving pretty lackluster reviews. Then add Hisense and TCL selling QLED TVs at price points that will doubtless be even lower than Samsung's, and the term starts to become worthless.

When Samsung does finally release an emissive QLED display how are they going to differentiate it in the market from Chinese brands selling 65" edge-lit QLED TVs for $599 or convince people that bought into QLED with a severely compromised product like the Q7 that these new QLEDs are a different type of QLED?

It seems like Samsung is being a bit shortsighted, trying to grab sales with a big marketing push now without much thought as to how that's going to hinder them when real emissive quantum dot displays come out later.
^^^ This is a reasonable, rational objection to using the term this way. But, it would appear the cat is already out of the bag.

My guess? "Real" QLED i.e. emissive gets called something else, who knows what.

Let the games begin...

Mark Henninger, Senior Editor at AVS Forum
imagic is offline  
post #27 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 12:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Exist_To_Resist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 173
QLED, lol.
Samsung is really beating the old LCD horse hard, aren't they.

With the proposed LG OLED investment by Google ($900 Million) they stand no chance in hell.
OLED is here now, it looks gorgeous, it has every advantage over LCD, and these trashy LCD panels don't stand a chance.
Also with all things Samsung blowing up and the spying scandal, Samsung is to be avoided like the plague.
Someone asked me recently about which TV they should buy, I told them anything but Samsung.
A little too late IMO.
FalconRGB likes this.

OLED is a game changer.
Exist_To_Resist is offline  
post #28 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 01:09 PM
Senior Member
 
cah95046's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 294 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exist_To_Resist View Post
QLED, lol.
Samsung is really beating the old LCD horse hard, aren't they.

With the proposed LG OLED investment by Google ($900 Million) they stand no chance in hell.
OLED is here now, it looks gorgeous, it has every advantage over LCD, and these trashy LCD panels don't stand a chance.
Also with all things Samsung blowing up and the spying scandal, Samsung is to be avoided like the plague.
Someone asked me recently about which TV they should buy, I told them anything but Samsung.
A little too late IMO.
Fact is if you can't sell it for $1,000 at Walmart it doesn't matter. To the average Joe (90% of the market), a $4000 65" OLED at BB doesn't look any better than the $1000 ($800!) 65" they see at Walmart.

TCL had their 55" S series for $400 (65" for $600 equivalent) on the shelf at Walmart last week. It is going to be real easy to pick up a 65" P series (with FPS not QD) for $1000 at Walmart in a few weeks. What should worry Samsung is not what OLED is doing, but, what TCL et al is going to do with enhanced LED phosphors which nearly match QD for WCG (see Sony 900e).

If someone figures out how to start using those same phosphors in place of the current color filter materials, then who needs QDCF. We will have very bright (3x) opto missive LCD for darn cheap.

**

QD vs phosphors
I had expected QD to be the driver for WCG in future displays. However, it seems FPS phosphors are winning most of the design wins. With white LEDs based on FPS phosphors in the BLU, no QDEF is needed to achieve a WCG, saving money.

QD market penetration remains limited to the very high end. The much, much higher volume consumer displays are using FPS phosphors. SS uses QD in their QLED series but not in their MU series. Sony "Trilumious" WCG technology is based on FPS phosphors.

from rtings:
SS KS8000 (QD) 96% DCI, 74% REC 2020
Sony 900E (FPS) 96% DCI, 72% REC 2020

TCL P series plans to use FPS. When I first learned this I was disappointed. However, seeing that Sony using FPS achieves the same performance as SS with QD, I am encouraged.

http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles...lications.html

Last edited by cah95046; 04-17-2017 at 05:49 PM.
cah95046 is offline  
post #29 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 02:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
Exist_To_Resist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by cah95046 View Post
Fact is if you can't sell it for $1,000 at Walmart it doesn't matter. To the average Joe (90% of the market), a $4000 65" OLED at BB doesn't look any better than the $1000 ($800!) 65" they see at Walmart.

TCL had their 55" S series for $400 (65" for $600 equivalent) on the shelf at Walmart last week. It is going to be real easy to pick up a 65" P series (with FPS vs QD) for $1000 at Walmart in a few weeks. What should worry Samsung is not what OLED is doing, but, what TCL et al is going to do with enhanced LED phosphors which nearly match QD for WCG (see Sony 900e).

If someone figures out how to start using those same phosphors in place of the current color filter materials, then who needs QDCF. We will have very bright (3x) opto missive LCD for darn cheap.

**

QD vs phosphors
I had expected QD to be the driver for WCG in future displays. However, it seems FPS phosphors are winning most of the design wins. With white LEDs based on FPS phosphors in the BLU, no QDEF is needed to achieve a WCG, saving money.

QD market penetration remains limited to the very high end. The much, much higher volume consumer displays are using FPS phosphors. SS uses QD in their QLED series but not in their MU series. Sony "Trilumious" WCG technology is based on FPS phosphors.

from rtings:
SS KS8000 (QD) 96% DCI, 74% REC 2020
Sony 900E (FPS) 96% DCI, 72% REC 2020

TCL P series plans to use FPS. When I first learned this I was disappointed. However, seeing that Sony using FPS achieves the same performance as SS with QD, I am encouraged.

http://www.gelighting.com/LightingWe...201-100804.pdf
Your link isn't working for me.

I think that year by year all these panel technologies are going to get cheaper.
Also you have the PC market which can be a huge win for any of these, especially in the professional photography/design space.
This means nice deep blacks and accurate colour space and gamut.
I guess we will see how fast and how cheap they can truly make these panels, after all as you mention price is a huge factor for the main segment of the consumer market.

OLED is a game changer.
Exist_To_Resist is offline  
post #30 of 58 Old 04-17-2017, 04:00 PM
Senior Member
 
cah95046's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 294 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exist_To_Resist View Post
Your link isn't working for me.

I think that year by year all these panel technologies are going to get cheaper.
Also you have the PC market which can be a huge win for any of these, especially in the professional photography/design space.
This means nice deep blacks and accurate colour space and gamut.
I guess we will see how fast and how cheap they can truly make these panels, after all as you mention price is a huge factor for the main segment of the consumer market.
fixed the link
cah95046 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

Tags
Hisense , qled tv , Samsung , tcl

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