UHD/4K First Impressions - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 62Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 06:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas oled View Post
Watching a really good 4k demo on the LG 79" 4k set. Best colors I have ever seen IMO blows the Sony 79b away. No banding. 10 bit panel looks great too me
But black levels are horrendous. BTW, I thought the Sony colors were still better. In fact I put one of my 4K videos on both and the Sony was, to me, the clear winner.
Ken Ross is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 07:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sebenste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: DeKalb, IL
Posts: 3,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRaven72 View Post
I am never going to give up the right to own physical media or the fight for it. When we get too lazy to get off our butts to put a disc in a player that will have better SOUND and PICTURE, we have totally given in to corporate ownership. You're cloud isn't yours. You don't own **** at Vudu or any other streaming company. Unless Fiber takes off across this country other than select markets like Kansas City and a few others, you're going to settle on over compressed 4K? Comcast and most news affiliates are still shooting in 720p, transmitting at 1080i. You know how many times I had movies that would blink out here and there over satellite VOD? Sent me right back to physical media and Comcast for tv.


And legally, you cannot tell people they own something when they buy it, and still hold it in your possession. Watch before long when Vudu, Xbox Video, etc. change it from "buy this video" to "Lifetime Streaming/Rental". They sure as hell are not going to let you download it. We need a real market crash to really set the point home. First thing that goes in peoples lives is entertainment. A lot of theaters closed up over this last recession. Steaming services would be one of the next. And they are protected under bankruptcy as to not have to provide you any refund for your giant Vudu collection you just lost. And its deservedly so.


What's more depressing is seeing this kind of logic out of a forum where pushing for the "best in AV" is more for settling for mediocre? Sad, because I would have thought that AVS Forum would have been one of the last place to give in to lower quality video through steaming versus a strong, proven physical media. This isn't so much an opinion either. Look at TV's. Plasma, best quality dead. DLP still better than LCD, dead. SED, never a chance. Now what we get now is a freakin Panel Lottery. LED is the cheapest lighting out there, with strobing, milky screens, clouding, and hazy,, really settled in a good technology didn't we? Beta was better than VHS picture wise, what did we get, the cheapest. Because a sad lot are too lazy to put a disc in the player we are getting the least expensive and cheapest video. Thanks again!
Raven, I think you are pointing the finger at the wrong direction: it's convenience, not laziness. The complexity of hooking up another device, and going out to the store, buying the physical media battling crowds...vs pushing a button. This is exactly why MP3's, which sound much poorer to an audiophile than one on a record, even with scratches...are popular. Some sacrifice of audio quality is OK as long as accessibility is easy.


And so, some tiling and whatnot is acceptable when the movie is available by one push of a button. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying this is where we are right now, and why.
And why I also think, in the long run, physical media will die. Who wants to take up a huge storage space for Blu-Rays you might never watch again, and oh yeah, the selection of movies is much wider?

As for me and 4K, I am an amateur photographer, and I salivate over the thought of seeing my 5k-size photos over a 4k TV instead of a small 2k monitor.
fafrd, StinDaWg and jhughy2010 like this.

Gilbert
sebenste is offline  
post #93 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 09:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
5x10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 467 Post(s)
Liked: 219
i would rather own a physical copy of a movie vs paying a monthly fee to have access to the movie
cheaper in the long run
5x10 is offline  
post #94 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 09:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
jhughy2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5x10 View Post
i would rather own a physical copy of a movie vs paying a monthly fee to have access to the movie
cheaper in the long run
You don't have to pay a monthly fee if you buy a movie through Amazon.

Theater set-up:  

AVR:  Pioneer VSX-820

Speakers:  5.1 consists of four NHT Classic Two bookshelf and an NHT TwoC center

Sub:  PSA-XV15

HTPC - ridiculously over-the-top, home-built gaming PC that I tinker with daily!

OTA antenna:  Winegard HD7698P

HDTV:  Sharp LC-60SQ15U

jhughy2010 is offline  
post #95 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 12:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Since we've covered the first impression of UHD how about ways to make todays UHD displays better. It seems that most here like them but not blown away just mildly impressed. For my vote they need to do a better job of upconverting a standard signal to something noticeably better than the current crop. 4K is great but most of us watch 1080p, 1080i, and 720p. I know we are at the mercy of signal compression so come up with a video processor to compensate better. Maybe a better overall panel. Maybe a magic wand. Just give me a 20% jump in PQ accross the board.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #96 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 01:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
CSonntag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Back in the SF Bay Area
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
Since we've covered the first impression of UHD how about ways to make todays UHD displays better. It seems that most here like them but not blown away just mildly impressed. For my vote they need to do a better job of upconverting a standard signal to something noticeably better than the current crop. 4K is great but most of us watch 1080p, 1080i, and 720p. I know we are at the mercy of signal compression so come up with a video processor to compensate better. Maybe a better overall panel. Maybe a magic wand. Just give me a 20% jump in PQ accross the board.
As usual, there is only so much that can be accomplished with an existing signal...the info just isn't there. Yes, better upscaling is possible, but at a certain point it becomes a matter of diminishing returns, as in how much more cost is a manufacturer willing to put into a display to get that little bit of extra perceived resolution that 99.9% of buyers won't notice?

Kinda reminds me of the same discussions I heard about upscaling SD when the first HDTVs started hitting the market. Yes, they got better at it, but I would venture to guess that was because the price of better upscaling components came down to the point that it was economical for the manufacturers to use them and still hold display prices down.

Take responsibility for your own actions...society is not here to look after you...
In other words, if you order coffee, expect it to be hot for christsake!
CSonntag is offline  
post #97 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSonntag View Post
Kinda reminds me of the same discussions I heard about upscaling SD when the first HDTVs started hitting the market. Yes, they got better at it, but I would venture to guess that was because the price of better upscaling components came down to the point that it was economical for the manufacturers to use them and still hold display prices down.
It depends a lot on the quality of the source. Most SD on cable today looks atrocious, but for certain types of content, SD can look decent, albeit without the detail afforded by HD. Although I wouldn't actively acquire SD content today if HD was available, I've seen a really good looking SD channels on Comcast, and I'd watch a movie I already have on DVD. It's just like the problem with HD being so over-compressed, and not getting anywhere near the potential of HD, and we're already moving to 4K.
BiggAW is offline  
post #98 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSonntag View Post
As usual, there is only so much that can be accomplished with an existing signal...the info just isn't there. Yes, better upscaling is possible, but at a certain point it becomes a matter of diminishing returns, as in how much more cost is a manufacturer willing to put into a display to get that little bit of extra perceived resolution that 99.9% of buyers won't notice?

Kinda reminds me of the same discussions I heard about upscaling SD when the first HDTVs started hitting the market. Yes, they got better at it, but I would venture to guess that was because the price of better upscaling components came down to the point that it was economical for the manufacturers to use them and still hold display prices down.
You are of course correct. You can't take hamburger and turn it into filet. My hope is that they can come up with a video processor that can take a compressed signal and uncompress it back to it's original form. Of course if they could do that with todays 1080p sets they probably would not need 4k. We'd be thrilled with a uncompressed 1080p signal.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #99 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:04 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Liked: 402
Came across this at DBSTalk in a thread about DIRECTV adding 4K content this year.

CableLabs Boots Up 4K Video Sharing Website

Actual site link,

http://4k.cablelabs.com/
Keenan is offline  
post #100 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,506
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
But black levels are horrendous.
thats a moot point for the masses.....which is what you need for a successful platform

as long as its big and cheap...it will sell

Picture quality...unfortunately , is a distant third to the above two

Warren

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5508 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp Atlantic technology System 350 THX Ultra speakers
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Pioneer SC37 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 Onkyo 5009/906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is online now  
post #101 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:11 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,665
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1122 Post(s)
Liked: 2274
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnne1 View Post
thats a moot point for the masses.....which is what you need for a successful platform

as long as its big and cheap...it will sell

Picture quality...unfortunately , is a distant third to the above two

Warren
Cheap is a very relative concept. 79-inch $10,000 TVs are not "for the masses." IMO, at that price and screen size, PQ better be great—including black levels.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #102 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhughy2010 View Post
You don't have to pay a monthly fee if you buy a movie through Amazon.

Or renting it to watch once (pay-per-view). In my mind, this is the most compelling advantage of streaming: you can decide 'on-the-fly' what you want to watch and you only pay for what you use...
fafrd is offline  
post #103 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mo949's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,977
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnne1 View Post
thats a moot point for the masses.....which is what you need for a successful platform

as long as its big and cheap...it will sell

Picture quality...unfortunately , is a distant third to the above two

Warren

Moot or not, the point remains valid to all of us that care. Although I agree with the gist of what you are saying there's a major ingredient left out that will part average Joe from his hard earned $$ and that is 'Branding'; 'Joe' will pay more for this ingredient. IMO the Sony has signifantly more street cred with 'Joe' than 'LG' does strictly in the TV department. LG's OLED may go a long way to changing the comparison if 'Joe' ever notices why OLED is better, and then he'd likely be dumb enough to use that branding to buy the LG LCD (which is crap IMO) when it goes for the cheap
mo949 is offline  
post #104 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,506
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Cheap is a very relative concept. 79-inch $10,000 TVs are not "for the masses." IMO, at that price and screen size, PQ better be great—including black levels.
agreed

I dont even think a $3,000 Tv is for the masses
however considering the Microcenter deal recently for the Sharp 70" LC-70UQ17U at $1499.00
I understand that Sharp 70" has pretty good picture quality... good enough for a 70" Tv , at $1499, for them to sell well

My issue is 9 more inches ...4K capability..
ok
...but $8500 more for an equivalent 1080P picture

really?

Warren
fafrd and imagic like this.

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5508 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp Atlantic technology System 350 THX Ultra speakers
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Pioneer SC37 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 Onkyo 5009/906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is online now  
post #105 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Cheap is a very relative concept. 79-inch $10,000 TVs are not "for the masses." IMO, at that price and screen size, PQ better be great—including black levels.
$1800 for a 70-inch from a major mfgr with smart features and 3d qualifies as big, cheap, and thus for the masses. It's unlikely that anyone would consider a 79" TV at any price as " for the masses". It won't be long and you'll see some 4k sets meeting those qualifications. Professional Reveiws of this particular $1800 above mentioned sample are very good.

Last edited by andy sullivan; 08-14-2014 at 02:24 PM.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #106 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:27 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,665
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1122 Post(s)
Liked: 2274
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
$1800 from a major mfgr with smart features and 3d qualifies as big, cheap, and thus for the masses. It won't be long and you'll see some 4k sets meeting those qualifications. Professional Reveiws of this particular $1800 above mentioned sample are very good.
Right, so when UHD/4K no longer comes at such a huge premium vs. 1080p, it'll be OK if the PQ alone is not enough to justify a markup in the thousands over a similar-size 1080p, which is still the case when dealing with TVs over 70 inches in size. That day has not arrived yet, and don't forget that the price of 1080p TVs is also dropping.
jhughy2010 likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #107 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,506
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post
Moot or not, the point remains valid to all of us that care. Although I agree with the gist of what you are saying there's a major ingredient left out that will part average Joe from his hard earned $$ and that is 'Branding'; 'Joe' will pay more for this ingredient. IMO the Sony has signifantly more street cred with 'Joe' than 'LG' does strictly in the TV department. LG's OLED may go a long way to changing the comparison if 'Joe' ever notices why OLED is better, and then he'd likely be dumb enough to use that branding to buy the LG LCD (which is crap IMO) when it goes for the cheap

key words I bolded in your statement

Not sure that AVS forum represents enough market share to "prop up" at platform

I can name 7-8 products off the top of my head that were well respected here that didn't make it in the market place. Some not even past 1 season

IMO..Sony doesnt have near the street cred they had 6-7 years ago....back in the days when they were actually making a profit on the in Tv business

I think Samsung is probably the brand with the most street cred right now

Though..its a moot point as these companies are looking for profits and not street cred

I think LG has the financial resources, in their Tv business, to push a new platform into the market
I dont see Sony( or Panasonic) investing heavily in something new and completely innovative
IMO...neither has had the years of profitability that it usually takes for a company to take the risk on a large investment in an unknown platform
You have to look to LG and Samsung..IMO...for those things

Warren
fafrd and StinDaWg like this.

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5508 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp Atlantic technology System 350 THX Ultra speakers
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Pioneer SC37 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 Onkyo 5009/906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is online now  
post #108 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:36 PM
Member
 
dudae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Until cable outlets start broadcasting in 4k forget about this becoming a big deal for most people. Most TV buyers in the household are men and most men buy the big TV to watch sports. That may not be true on this forum but guy's watch a lot more sports than movies.

That being said, until ESPN, Fox Sports, the NFL broadcasters and the others start giving us 4K content most guys won't care. I don't see this happening for a long, long time. Heck the cable companies are still broadcasting in 1080i and everyone now has 1080p. You want 4k? Lot's of luck.

Look at 3d, it pretty much died when ESPN dropped it's 3d channel.
dudae is offline  
post #109 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 02:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,506
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Right, so when UHD/4K no longer comes at such a huge premium vs. 1080p, it'll be OK if the PQ alone is not enough to justify a markup in the thousands over a similar-size 1080p, which is still the case when dealing with TVs over 70 inches in size. That day has not arrived yet, and don't forget that the price of 1080p TVs is also dropping.
I bet it has to be coming soon if they want to move 4K TV's

4K is going to have to be like 1080P was a few years ago...where they keep dropping it in lower models
It needs to be a part of middle of the road TV's

at 2x-3x the price for a 55 inch 1080P how many are going to bite when their current 55" is is only a couple of years old at best

I see some serious price drops coming...even more so than I have seen in the edge lit 4K's this year

too much saturation in the market that has made them try to come up with something new each year to bring out the buying public

Warren
fafrd and dsinger like this.

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5508 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp Atlantic technology System 350 THX Ultra speakers
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Pioneer SC37 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 Onkyo 5009/906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is online now  
post #110 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 03:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Right, so when UHD/4K no longer comes at such a huge premium vs. 1080p, it'll be OK if the PQ alone is not enough to justify a markup in the thousands over a similar-size 1080p, which is still the case when dealing with TVs over 70 inches in size. That day has not arrived yet, and don't forget that the price of 1080p TVs is also dropping.
I don't know how to cherry plck sentences and not include some of them but apparently you do. I mentioned that a top brand 70 in. 1080p set with smart features and 3d fror under $ 1800 is a big screen TV for the masses while you mention 79 in TV for $10,000 is not. Even at the correct price of $7999 that 79 in is certainly not for the masses. If it was $2999 the size alone would negate it from being for the masses. Here's a forecast for you. The 2017 models will not include one single 1080p set from a major mfgr bigger than 55in. They will all be 4K.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #111 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 03:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
I don't know how to cherry plck sentences and not include some of them but apparently you do. I mentioned that a top brand 70 in. 1080p set with smart features and 3d fror under $ 1800 is a big screen TV for the masses while you mention 79 in TV for $10,000 is not. Even at the correct price of $7999 that 79 in is certainly not for the masses. If it was $2999 the size alone would negate it from being for the masses. Here's a forecast for you. The 2017 models will not include one single 1080p set from a major mfgr bigger than 55in. They will all be 4K.

In general I agree with all you have written, though defining what we mean by 'the masses' is a subtlety. When I was in Costco last weekend, I noticed three 80" 1080p TVs - the 2014 Vizio for $3000, and a Sharp and a Samsung (one of which was only 79" and one of which was even less than $3000, but I didn't take notes).


So my definition of 'the masses' is anyone buying a TV that Costco has in stock and by that definition, 80" $3000 1080p TVs may be for 'the masses' already. If they disappear before Black Friday, we'll know that they didn't sell and your above statement is correct (for now), but if they remain in Costco's display inventory through CES2015 and beyond, I believe that means size alone does not negate these 80" TVs being for 'the masses' as long as the price is right ($3000 or less).
fafrd is offline  
post #112 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 03:50 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,665
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1122 Post(s)
Liked: 2274
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
I don't know how to cherry plck sentences and not include some of them but apparently you do. I mentioned that a top brand 70 in. 1080p set with smart features and 3d fror under $ 1800 is a big screen TV for the masses while you mention 79 in TV for $10,000 is not. Even at the correct price of $7999 that 79 in is certainly not for the masses. If it was $2999 the size alone would negate it from being for the masses. Here's a forecast for you. The 2017 models will not include one single 1080p set from a major mfgr bigger than 55in. They will all be 4K.

And here is a prediction for you. In 2017 the definition of major TV manufacturers will be companies like Vizio (in the US), TCL, HiSense, in addition to the two Korean companies. It will not refer to any Japanese company.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #113 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 04:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
And here is a prediction for you. In 2017 the definition of major TV manufacturers will be companies like Vizio (in the US), TCL, HiSense, in addition to the two Korean companies. It will not refer to any Japanese company.
I totally agree with you. Possibly Sony and or Panasonlc may be buying OLED panels from LG or HiSense, TCL, or Innolux but most likely not. Hard to say what Sharp might do. I thought they would be gone by now but government investing goes a long way.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #114 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 04:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
In general I agree with all you have written, though defining what we mean by 'the masses' is a subtlety. When I was in Costco last weekend, I noticed three 80" 1080p TVs - the 2014 Vizio for $3000, and a Sharp and a Samsung (one of which was only 79" and one of which was even less than $3000, but I didn't take notes).


So my definition of 'the masses' is anyone buying a TV that Costco has in stock and by that definition, 80" $3000 1080p TVs may be for 'the masses' already. If they disappear before Black Friday, we'll know that they didn't sell and your above statement is correct (for now), but if they remain in Costco's display inventory through CES2015 and beyond, I believe that means size alone does not negate these 80" TVs being for 'the masses' as long as the price is right ($3000 or less).
I think I like you're Costco definition. I was in Costco last weekend and they had a 2013 Vizio 80" 3d and a 2014 80" non 3d for like $50 difference. A samsung 75" and a Sharp 80" all for under $3K. Last I looked though Costco was only west of Ohio. With fewer and fewer BB stores out there it's becoming difficult to go eyeball a big screen TV. Out here we have Fry's Electronics and Best Buy. I just set up my Sony 70x850b and I really like it.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #115 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 04:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,562
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
I think I like you're Costco definition. I was in Costco last weekend and they had a 2013 Vizio 80" 3d and a 2014 80" non 3d for like $50 difference. A samsung 75" and a Sharp 80" all for under $3K. Last I looked though Costco was only west of Ohio. With fewer and fewer BB stores out there it's becoming difficult to go eyeball a big screen TV. Out here we have Fry's Electronics and Best Buy. I just set up my Sony 70x850b and I really like it.

Yeah, that sounds like the same three sets I saw in my local Costco here in the Bay Area. And I think they had a Vizio and a Sharp 80" early this year, so the number of 75"-80" TVs seems to have actually increased since then. We'll see if it holds but it's a sign to me that below $3000, 'the masses' do have interest in TVs that size...


In addition to Costco, Fry's and BB, we also have Sam's Club as well as the ever present Walmart and Target also carrying Vizio TVs (but no 80"ers on the shelves at Walmart or Target that I am aware of, at last so far).
fafrd is offline  
post #116 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, Not as far east as Vegas
Posts: 1,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
It depends a lot on the quality of the source. Most SD on cable today looks atrocious, but for certain types of content, SD can look decent, albeit without the detail afforded by HD. Although I wouldn't actively acquire SD content today if HD was available, I've seen a really good looking SD channels on Comcast, and I'd watch a movie I already have on DVD. It's just like the problem with HD being so over-compressed, and not getting anywhere near the potential of HD, and we're already moving to 4K.
I've seen SD downloads from CNN that looked quite good, I've seen SD over the air that didn't look so good. I've seen HD over the air that looked worse than Netflix. Even with so called high quality sources (I've seen blu-rays that looked no better than streaming). I'm with you when it comes to buying new SD vs HD.

"Bring out yer dead!".."Wait I'm not dead yet!"..(Sound Austrian here) "WRONG !!" (You know what happens next..)
tenthplanet is offline  
post #117 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 06:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
Last I looked though Costco was only west of Ohio.
We've had Costco's (originally know as Price Club's) in Virginia and Maryland for decades. We also have BJ's, Sam's Club, Sears, Kmart, Walmart, Target, hhgregg, and Best Buy's galore. We have a few Big Screen Strores, a couple Crutchfield stores, at least one remaining Sony Store, one or two Bang & Olafsun stores in the upscale malls, and a handful of locally owned specialty stores. No shortage of places to check out TV's around here.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
post #118 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 06:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Vegas oled's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,545
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 845 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
But black levels are horrendous. BTW, I thought the Sony colors were still better. In fact I put one of my 4K videos on both and the Sony was, to me, the clear winner.
The black levels were not bad in a bright room on the LG. The colors on the LG were better than any display I have ever seen. Of course we all see things different. I saw absolutely no banding on the LG.
Vegas oled is offline  
post #119 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 06:55 PM
Member
 
kenoh89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I consider anything below $2000 for the masses! If they can get 75" - 80" TV's at $2000 & under, then it has mass appeal! The Samsung UN75F6300" is close to that, BTW! I consider that a big screen 70"+ mass appeal TV!


If you check google you'll see it hovering at just over $2000, with one shop selling it for $1960 with free shipping! So tell me? Would a regular Joe buy that or a 55" 4k TV?
imagic likes this.

Last edited by kenoh89; 08-14-2014 at 07:34 PM.
kenoh89 is offline  
post #120 of 141 Old 08-14-2014, 08:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas oled View Post
The black levels were not bad in a bright room on the LG. The colors on the LG were better than any display I have ever seen. Of course we all see things different. I saw absolutely no banding on the LG.
The LG was located in Magnolia near me, and even the BB guy was commenting on the gray LB bars. He said they tried everything tho get them darker, but no luck.

There's a huge difference between the lighting on the BB sales floor and the much dimmer lighting in Magnolia. I saw the 79" Sony at a Sony store today for the first time, and even their lighting was quite a bit dimmer than BB. That's why the Sony looked much more disappointing today than ever before when I was at BB.

It's all in the lighting and it's why I've said it's very tough to assess PQ on the BB sales floor.
Ken Ross is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Tags
frontpage

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