Emissive HDTVs Beat Transmissive UHDTVs in Value Electronics 2014 Shootout - Page 8 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 578Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 08:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,436
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Actually, the point is that LCD technology is still flawed—even a $120,000 TV can't hide the underlying issues. To pretend that slightly sharper footage would somehow negate all the image quality tests the LED-lit UHDTVs failed (relative to the emissive displays) is wishful thinking.
How can you assume all attendees would agree with you? If given the option the results could of been different.

It is in fact even important the uhd sets because MOTION is way better on my set when watching uhd material. Colors. Sharpness of images.

Those things still are benefits.

The shootout was to show lcd tech is flawed?
Mrorange303 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 08:07 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,671
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1129 Post(s)
Liked: 2277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
How can you assume all attendees would agree with you? If given the option the results could of been different.

It is in fact even important the uhd sets because MOTION is way better on my set when watching uhd material. Colors. Sharpness of images.

Those things still are benefits.

The shootout was to show lcd tech is flawed?
The votes speak for themselves, emissive beat transmissive.

The shootout shows how the TVs really perform, relative to each other.

You love your TV, and I am happy for you.

The shootout is not held to show that LCD tech is flawed. The Sharp Elite won in 2011. What this year's shootout shows is that a few models from the current generation of high-end LCD-based UHDTVs made by Sony and Samsung are flawed—there are many more TVs out there. However, they are all flawed in the same ways, which happen to be the issues that affect all LCDs, regardless of resolution.

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.

Last edited by imagic; 08-22-2014 at 08:35 AM.
imagic is offline  
post #213 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 2,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by barth2k View Post
^^^ still looks too reddish. I can see too that that angle is not doing the f8500 any favor with its louvre filter.

I don't think it's fair to say the oleds and plasma won despite smaller sizes, as the Lcd larger sizes only magnify their flaws. Maybe we need a reshootout if the 4k oled and P series show up in time
4K UHD OLED no doubt will be interesting but Vizio P doesn't interest me in the least as technological advance .
OTOH it may be an excellent UHD LCD cost vs picture quality value proposition .

TBH from a technical standpoint I think it's a yawn ,AFAIK it will be just another LCD FALD set probably better than Visio's current offerings to one degree or another but will it match the current Sony FALD sets if it can beat those it might be a small advance in tech and a huge advance for Visio which it may well be on it's own merits anyway .

In the end it will be just another LCD FALD set probably probably with an LGD IPS panel and because of these things and being an LCD probably not remarkable other than as a cost to picture quality value solution and an up market move for Visio . ofc there is nothing wrong with that at all.

IOW I don't anticipate the Visio P or any LCD in 2014/2015 ~ to significantly advance the state of the art if you will .
It seems to me as if LCD in general is at a plateau for now and significant advances would likely have to come from the panel OEM's.

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -

Last edited by tubetwister; 08-22-2014 at 08:39 AM.
tubetwister is online now  
post #214 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,983
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Actually, the point is that LCD technology is still flawed—even a $120,000 TV can't hide the underlying issues. To pretend that slightly sharper footage would somehow negate all the image quality tests the LED-lit UHDTVs failed (relative to the emissive displays) is wishful thinking.

That said, check out the latest episode of Home Theater Geeks when it's posted. Scott and I chat with Robert about the shootout. For next year's event, there's a good chance of a HD vs. UHD comparison using cinematic content. i
Actually that was originally Robert's intent for this year. Just didn't pan out.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #215 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 2,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthias Hutter
Some explanation on flicker:

Flicker perception varies little by person. People that get migraines/epilepsy actually have a lower flicker perception. (You can still get headaches even if the flicker isn't visibly)
But flicker perceptions varies a lot with brightness, field of view and periphery.

So @imagic is probably right to say that he never noticed flicker in a controlled viewing environment and/or watching low APL movies, such as at the TV Shootout.
Very good post although the geek math was above my level of understanding rest of post and graphical representation was very good IMO.
FWIW the last time I remember being conscious peripheral flicker was on 17" CRT PC monitor with a an SVGA video card in the early 2000's I cant remember what refresh I was using then but it was well above 60Hz as I recall .

I Don't remember any flicker on Sony Trinitron ,FD Wega or FDHD Wega sets I had and none on my first 50" plasma or the 60" I have now and ofc none on the 5 LCD both CCFL and LED TV's or the other 4 PC LCD/LED PC monitors here . Anyway there are likely a few more sensitive to 60Hz (or other Hz ) screen or panel flicker than me anyway

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -
tubetwister is online now  
post #216 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
vddobrev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
The votes speak for themselves, emissive beat transmissive.

The shootout shows how the TVs really perform, relative to each other.

You love your TV, and I am happy for you.

The shootout is not held to show that LCD tech is flawed. The Sharp Elite won in 2011. What this year's shootout shows is that a few models from the current generation of high-end LCD-based UHDTVs made by Sony and Samsung are flawed—there are many more TVs out there. However, they are all flawed in the same ways, which happen to be the issues that affect all LCDs, regardless of resolution.
Mark, can you please share the Sharp Elite exact model number that won in 2011. Sorry, I did not follow this back then.
vddobrev is offline  
post #217 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JWhip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wayne, PA
Posts: 4,164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubby497 View Post
To be fair Kuro's have issues as well (rising black, red tint, etc). but I do agree with you as Kuro's are more well rounded.

However, I would dump my tweaked KRP with an OLED in a heart beat (65" or 77").

Flat 55" OLED is around $3000 and it's reported to have less issues than the curved model.
I just watched the flat OLED at.Harrods in London and the motion was terrible. I don't think I could live with that watching sports. The price they want for t over here is insane too.
imagic likes this.
JWhip is offline  
post #218 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,983
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by vddobrev View Post
Mark, can you please share the Sharp Elite exact model number that won in 2011. Sorry, I did not follow this back then.
Sharp Elite Pro 60x5FD & 70x5FD
Ken Ross is offline  
post #219 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NuSoardGraphite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 1,363
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
AFAIK it is time to move on. Time to fully support OLED and forget about Plasma.
OLED is still too expensive. its going to be at least another 2 or 3 years before the prices become competitive with LCD, and when that happens, LCDs will probably be cheaper and hit the price point plasmas had before they died. (Hopefully, anyway)
NuSoardGraphite is offline  
post #220 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
vddobrev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 39
My opinion with regards to the Samsung HU9000 performance in the shoot is that the 85" version is worse than the 65", which I personally have, and does not suffer the weak points shown in the shootout. At leaset not to that obvious level.
vddobrev is offline  
post #221 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:33 AM
Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_to_my_ear View Post
Lets clear this up...

Kuros are plasma tvs.

Any plasma tv will have better off angle viewing and motion resolution than any led/lcd tv.

This is not a pioneer kuro-specific feature.

The only kuro spefic feature is the black levels which have ( according to sources ) been outclassed by the Panasonic ZT/VT60 pdp.....but the difference is extremely minute it would take a side by side comparison and nit-picking to see the differences.
Good points!

However, there's another factor to be added into the mix. The 2008 Pioneer Kuro did not offer 3D, and would have used longer persistence phosphors than a 2013 Samsung F8500 or Panasonic ZT/VT 60. The longer persistence phosphors combined with viewing in a dark room at low brightness levels would have assisted in masking flicker compared with a 3D capable plasma of today.

Quote:
Any plasma tv will have better off angle viewing and motion resolution than any led/lcd tv.
While technically true, for many viewers these advantages will be of no practical consequence.

For example a couple viewing a 24fps Blu-ray from a couch located directly in front of a display will not be troubled by off-angle viewing, or motion blur. The 24fps Blu-ray will contribute motion blur in its frames taken with a 1/48th second exposure time. Even for watching sport, only some viewers are conscious of any blurring introduced by today's led/lcd screens.

If viewing in the daytime with a reasonable extent of natural light, rather than in a home cinema shielded from daylight, minimum black level will become less important and brightness capability more important. An led/lcd with good local dimming is perfectly adequate for minimum black level in a living room at night. (For example, I find my current Sony 4k 65" led/lcd set gives a much lower minimum black level than my 2010 model Panasonic VT20 50" plasma.)

If using a display for web surfing, plasma is not well suited, as the screens power down somewhat when faced with a sustained requirement to display a full screen of white. This protects against overheating and image retention. If the screen does not power down, bright sections are prone to visible flicker, especially if the panel has been designed for 3D use.

When I read it, I find the tone of the following statement rather dismissive of LCD technology, despite the fact that in a real world setting of a centrally located sofa in a living room the compromise of LED/LCD may be the more suitable compromise for many people and technical tests such as motion resolution may be of no practical relevance to the viewing experience:
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Actually, the point is that LCD technology is still flawed—even a $120,000 TV can't hide the underlying issues. To pretend that slightly sharper footage would somehow negate all the image quality tests the LED-lit UHDTVs failed (relative to the emissive displays) is wishful thinking.
Lack of 3D testing

I also note that despite 3D having been a feature of display panels since 2010, it is still typically omitted from shootouts. Had 3D performance been included in the current shootout, it would have provided an opportunity for any 4k passive 3D screen to excel. They arguably have much better 3D performance in rendering Full HD 3D than a plasma panel. This is because plasma technology battles to achieve low ghosting at the same time as high brightness, and introduces a timing discrepancy between presentation of the left and right images. [There may also be possible interference with color because of tinting of the active glasses.] 4k passive screens (at least the leading brands!) are a delight to watch in 3D mode. They produce a steady, perfectly synchronized, view of left and right, with good brightness, and low ghosting.

Last edited by MLXXX; 08-22-2014 at 11:39 AM.
MLXXX is offline  
post #222 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
barth2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Does oled tech have inherent flaws that cannot be overcome without prohibitive cost, as in we can make a good lcd but we need 1000 dimming zones cost? The good news is out of the gate oled already edges out the best plasma in blacks and contrast. The other good news is oleds will have to improve much much faster than plasma did to survive. I would feel better if there were more than one player and the one player weren't LG.
barth2k is online now  
post #223 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
Thanks, Eternal Noob. I've now read a relevant article by Joe Kane dated 19 March 2014. He has obviously considered implications of attempting to implement the Rec 2020 color in a lot of detail, and has many insights to offer in the 26 page document: http://www.buschhometheater.com/wp/w...-19Mar2014.pdf
Thanks for this reference, which I am trying to read. So far, though, I just don't understand Kane's reasoning about the narrowness of bandwidth required for rec. 2020 gamut colors. He says, "The colors specified in ITU 2020 are at the outside edge of the CIE diagram. Any point along the outside edge of the CIE diagram is a single wavelength." Why would either of those things be so?

The points at the vertices of the triangle representing a color gamut on the CIE diagram represent a single primary, but not a single wavelength. The points along the edges of the triangle represent two primaries, but again, not a single wavelength, it seems to me.

Maybe someone can clarify Kane's reasoning.

Greg Lee

Last edited by GregLee; 08-22-2014 at 10:15 AM.
GregLee is offline  
post #224 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 09:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,983
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
^ Formatting error, stuttering issue or taken over by an alien?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #225 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
^ Formatting error, stuttering issue or taken over by an alien?
Alien. I spent 15 minutes trying to copy a quote from Joe Kane's article with some format daemon fighting me all the while.
Ken Ross likes this.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #226 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 10:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
jon_rhees's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Riverton, UT, USA
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by barth2k View Post
Does oled tech have inherent flaws that cannot be overcome without prohibitive cost, as in we can make a good lcd but we need 1000 dimming zones cost? The good news is out of the gate oled already edges out the best plasma in blacks and contrast. The other good news is oleds will have to improve much much faster than plasma did to survive. I would feel better if there were more than one player and the one player weren't LG.

The short answer is a qualified *no*. Of *course* OLED has limitations (or you may call them 'flaws'). ALL TECHNOLOGY has trade-offs (even Plasma). I am NOT talking about tradeoffs in visible performance, either. I am talking tradeoffs down at the engineering level. For example, some of the trade-offs for Plasma have been (and still are), difficulty to drive (high-voltage drive electronics are complicated) and difficulty to manufacture. Great strides have been made in the last 10 years in plasma drive electronics, overcoming much of the cost and power inefficiency barriers. Panel manufacturing made great strides as well, improving yield while decreasing cell size and cell longevity. However, as cell size shrunk, the panel cost started going up again. Plasma panel manufacturers are NOT willing to burden the cost of future TV's with the high cost to produce a UHD plasma panel at the 50-70" sizes. The simple fact is that other panel technologies (LCD, OLED) are cheaper to produce and increasing pixel density does not add a substantial cost to the panel.


Now let's talk about OLED limitations or trade-offs:


1. emitter life (on the panel itself) -- This is a major issue, that, I believe, will be incrementally improved for many generations. Panel manufacturers have a vested interest in improving this aspect of OLED technology -- not primarily to make TV enthusiasts happy, mind you. Instead, there is great motivation to improve organic LED longevity because of so many other lighting applications. As improvements are made, the chemistry will make it into the panels.


2. emitter brightness (on the panel, and on the pixel drivers) -- This is somewhat married with emitter life (listed above). There are a number of factors that affect the luminance decay of the OLED emitter, including outside radiation (IR) and stress to the P-N junction of the emitter through heat, electron migration, etc. Generally, as chemistry is improved to address emitter life, we can drive the LED's 'harder' to achieve greater brightness (we don't have to drive them harder, but as life at a given brightness level exceeds the lifespan of the typical consumer purchase interval, higher brightness becomes an option). Besides chemistry, the other factors that affect brightness are a) heat dissipation and b) drive capability.
a. Heat dissipation is critical because it defines how quickly the heat can be moved away from the emitter. As an analogy, some of the largest strides that have been made in the last 5 years with LED lighting (replacing incandescent) are related to improved heat dissipation of the LED's, thus allowing higher wattage-equivalent bulbs. I believe there will be incremental improvements with heat dissipation, but I think they will not advance as far as chemistry improvements simply because of potential added manufacturing costs.
b. Drive electronics are key to several factors of OLED performance -- these electronics are not integral to the panel (yet) but they determine the ability to modulate each pixel as needed as well as potential pixel brightness. The current crop of OLED's use the simplest drive scheme (some call it sample-and-hold). Basically, this means that each pixel is driven with a modulated current defining the pixel's current brightness (defining the overall RGB color of the pixel triad) for the duration of the frame. This is the most efficient, because, for example, if I want to turn all pixels on 100% (white static image), each driver transistor needs to be capable of a set current (or power output capability) equal to that of the OLED's full-scale 100% duty-cycle current. This current might be around, say, 5 milliamps per pixel. Contrast that with the drive electronics I believe we will see 2 or 3 generations down the road, which will be capable of 'scanning' the display. Scanning is a simplification here, but basically means that I can 'pulse' a pixel for shorter periods of time than the entire duration of the frame while *still* retaining the same perceived brightness. This has been done for years on scanned LED displays, and the understanding of the human eye's brightness perception versus pulse width/brightness are well understood. HOWEVER, scanning presents challenges in drive electronics and power supplies. For example, say I now want to drive the pixel at 10% duty cycle (this is ignoring the sub-modulation controlling the pixel intensity for color depth) but keep the same brightness. In a simplistic case, this means I must now drive the pixel *10 times harder*, or at a current of 50 milliamps in my example. So, I need a larger transistor, and perhaps I need a transistor with a lower 'on' resistance to avoid more heat. Even worse, if I choose to pulse all the pixels on the display at the same time at this 10-times factor, my power supply must be able to handle 10 times the instantaneous current. While all of this will be challenging (and add some possibly substantial cost to the electronics), these advances will come in future driver IC designs specific to OLED and in many ways are TRIVIAL compared to the complexity of the electronics that had to be designed to improve plasma.


3. Emitter structure -- it is hard to predict how this will evolve because I believe that some of these changes haven't even been discovered or though up yet. The emitter structure today requires filtering in front of the pixel to hide part of the anode. I believe this filtering is likely the cause of some of the color aberrations that we see when viewing off-axis. Much of this is irrelevant to OLED lighting (which as I said I believe will be the overall driver of advancements in the technology). I believe we will see improvements that help image displays *if* they do not add substantial costs. As I said in a post elsewhere, TV manufacturers have to think long and hard these days about adding much cost to their displays when the majority must sell in the sub-$1000 commodity bloodbath -- The past decade of [the majority of] consumers who were so excited to have their first large flat panel and plopped down $3000-$5000 for it is no more.


MY OPINION (it is an educated one, mind you, since I work close to these technologies) is that OLED offers one of the best infant technologies to add upon. For simplicity, I would say that the OLED TV's we are seeing today represent a 2nd or 3rd-generation display. Throw another 5 generations on top of what we already are seeing and we'll have something to rave about.


Jon
fafrd, barth2k, dsinger and 6 others like this.
jon_rhees is offline  
post #227 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 11:03 AM
Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
Maybe someone can clarify Kane's reasoning.
I think it goes like this. The current Rec 709 primaries are not defined as a single pure electromagnetic frequency but as a mixture of frequencies (or wavelengths) that when viewed by the cones of the human eye give the perception of the defined primary "color". That perceived target color can be achieved using different mixtures of different wavelengths all added in together. That makes it easier to achieve adequate brightness of the "primary" as simple light sources can be used. It also means that the effects of slight differences in human cone response as a function of precise wavelength may tend to be diluted, leading to more people perceiving more or less the same primary colour.

I suspect though that a Rec 2020 primary color could be implemented adequately using a light source that contained wavelengths over a range of wavelengths reasonably near to the official Rec 2020 wavelength for the primary, averaging out to that perceptual wavelength, taking into account the typical passband of the human cones relevant for that Rec 2020 primary.

Birds would not be fooled for one moment by Rec 2020 as birds are generally thought to have four different types of cones [or even five in some cases], whereas human beings have only three. Also birds have oil in their cones to sharpen and differentiate the spectral responses as between the different cone types. An elegant arrangement.

Our human cones have considerable overlap in their spectral responses. The diagram on the following webpage illustrates how unevenly divided the response of our human cones is in the coverage of the human visible spectrum. It is remarkable we can perceive color as well as we do: http://www.webexhibits.org/causesofcolor/17B.html
tubetwister likes this.

Last edited by MLXXX; 08-22-2014 at 11:41 AM.
MLXXX is offline  
post #228 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 11:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,119
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
Uhd has a picture I prefer very very much over the kuro.
It's an LCD.

Your issue is your trying to convince people uhd has no benefit. Clearly in thin thread people know the truth and your not getting that support you did in a thread where people really don't understand the uhd tech.


Sir are you referring about this thread UHD/4K Quandary: To Buy or Not to Buy ?




Scott Wilkinson recommended 1080p also Imagic recommended 1080p.




who was the person disagreeing with every person the whole time?
mobius and tubetwister like this.

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000 /Sonos play:1 for bedrooms,kitchen,bathroom/Master bedroom Sonos sound bar/Sonos sub and Sonos play 1 surrounds.

Last edited by losservatore; 08-22-2014 at 01:55 PM.
losservatore is online now  
post #229 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 11:44 AM
Senior Member
 
Hisma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 300 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Here is the dilemma I am sure many others are in.

Are you really ready to make a significant investment in OLED? The tech is still in its infancy for consumer TVs, and there is only one OEM in town for it. Because of this, you're having to pay that "R&D" cost, to be an earlier adopter in a tech that hasn't fully matured yet.

Yes, you're getting the best contrast, and excellent all-around PQ. What appeals to me most about OLED is it excels in ALL viewing environments, unlike plasma. But it's at a significant cost.

How many people realistically have a budget for a $10,000 TV? I'm talking about the 65" EC9700 coming up. As someone who owns a 65" TV, I am NOT willing to sacrifice screen real estate for PQ improvements. I'm too used to being immersed in my larger set to go backwards.

So if we're talking about buying a new TV TODAY, it leaves essentially 4 options (imo):

1. Buy a F8500. You can snag one for a decent price still, but pretty soon they will be hard to come by as samsung ceases to produce them. If you're big into viewing in the dark, this is a good option. But it's 1080p only, and if you have a well lit living room and appreciate bright color, sorry, it's not ideal.
2. Buy a high-end LCD. You get a fantastic picture for day-time and well lit viewing, a proven technology that in most cases will last many years without fault. You also get 4K, which makes you future-proof. You sacrifice viewing angle and black level in really dark settings.
3. Buy a cheap LCD or plasma as a holdover. This is a good option if you absolutely must have OLED. But how long will it take until prices come down to reasonable levels, and are you willing to "suffer" with poor PQ to save the money? Affordable large OLED displays could still be years away.
4. Buy an OLED. Take the plunge. If you've got deep pockets this is an easy choice. But how will it feel when the next generation is significantly improved, and that $10,000 TV already looks dated next to the new and improved OLED?

In my opinion, it's an awkward time to buy a new TV, since we're in the midst of such a transition. Hate LCD all you want, but it's mature, looks great in MOST viewing environments (at the right angle), and will most likely last many years without a problem. I wouldn't feel comfortable buying OLED today, a) because of cost, and b) because of the fact that it still has a few generations of improvements to go before it's reached near it's peak potential. I chose option 2), since I still feel like it will be another year or two before large OLED displays are considered affordable.

By affordable, I should be able to snag a 65" FLAGSHIP OLED display for $5000 or less. To me, that's the sweet spot, and something I'd happily open my wallet for if it came down to it.

There is no obvious choice though, as to me they all come with caveats. So many people here make it sound as though you should either own a plasma or an OLED, but for the reasons I listed, it's not that simple of a decision.

And knowing everything I know about how my TV performed post shoot-out, I'm still very happy with the decision I made .
fafrd likes this.
Hisma is online now  
post #230 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 11:50 AM
Senior Member
 
Hisma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 300 Post(s)
Liked: 117
To add what I wrote above, I think one of the most important TVs to come out this year, other than OLED, is the vizio P and R series. It can potentially change the LED LCD landscape, and force the "top tier" manufacturers to rethink edge lit technology and curves, and go for the superior FALD technology.

As much as I love my sammy, I want to see vizio dominate and take a chunk out of the high end market, to light a fire under the @ss of the big OEMs and get them to shift their priorities (and price points).
fafrd and StinDaWg like this.
Hisma is online now  
post #231 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 11:55 AM
Senior Member
 
Eternal Noob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
Thanks, Eternal Noob. I've now read a relevant article by Joe Kane dated 19 March 2014. He has obviously considered implications of attempting to implement the Rec 2020 color in a lot of detail, and has many insights to offer in the 26 page document: http://www.buschhometheater.com/wp/w...-19Mar2014.pdf

I recall that in late 2006/early 2007 the Sony SXRD rear-pro sets with their ultra high presssure lamps produced greens I had never seen before on any display. I was gobsmacked! I think that that experience of mine may well be repeated in the future when I see certain true to life reds that I have not yet seen from any display.

Yes the 2020 color space will require longer words (more bits) to avoid posterization. And yes there are issues in using narrow bandwidth primaries to produce color that different human eyes will perceive in a similar way; and difficulties in achieving color accuracy across an expansive color space. However the lure of closer to nature greens and reds will I suspect prove very strong on the showroom floor. While the added definition of 4K is only a subtle effect without using very large screens, the truer to life greens and reds may be hard not to notice, and admire.
You're most welcome, MLXXX.

Yeah, the bandwidth issue was the one to which Mr. Kane devoted much of his time and energy at the shootout, and understandably so, but I agree with you that it's at least something of an open question whether or not some team of clever engineers can find a way around that. One thing I learned about clever engineers a long time ago: they're very good at finding their collective way around mechanical hurdles. Absent some such solution, though, the color space's bandwidth will be a big issue.

Equally compelling to me was the concern about bitrate. Suppose we widen our color space by a good 30%, but leave the bitrate at 8. What happens? Well, we have no choice, then, but to make our color transitions even more sudden, even less subtle than they already are. Given how annoying contouring already is to me, I'm not warm to that idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
As progress towards a Rec 2020 (or other yet to be defined) color space takes place in consumer displays over the next few years, no doubt there'll be purists who'll insist on a precisely calibrated though limited gamut color space such as Rec 709, in preference to a more expansive color space that is challenging or impossible to calibrate with the same precision.
Mm, I don't see it as an either/or proposition. I want a very precisely calibrated TV on a very robust, precisely defined color gamut that also has a much wider available triangle. For that, I suspect Mr. Kane is right that a large bandwidth and a bitrate of at least 12 (or even 16) will be needed. I suspect he's also right that in order for any of that to happen, a much bigger connectivity pipeline will have to be developed.

So I guess the lesson is, if we do this the right way, more sales for Monoprice! (Yayyy.)

-Noob

Last edited by Eternal Noob; 08-22-2014 at 12:00 PM. Reason: minor editing error
Eternal Noob is offline  
post #232 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 12:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
It also means that the effects of slight differences in human cone response as a function of precise wavelength may tend to be diluted, leading to more people perceiving more or less the same primary colour.
This part of the reasoning I think I understand, at least on an intuitive level. It's preferable to have wider bandwidth primaries, because it makes variations among the cone responses of different people less of a disturbing factor. But what I don't understand is why primaries that come nearer to the rec. 2020 gamut would have to be of narrower bandwidth. I'd think that giving the center frequency of a primary a more extreme value, without narrowing the bandwidth, would also move the primary toward the periphery of the CIE diagram.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #233 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 2,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6athome View Post
Mark do you know if the Samsung 85" 8550 is FALD? How many zones? If any of LCD panels are 10 bit?
T.T. here,
Samsung says they use UHD Dimming on the UHD 4K HU8550 Series Smart TV - 85” Class (84.5” Diag.)
maybe that's similar to what they used to call micro dimming on the 1080p sets ? they say ,

Quote:
"UHD Dimming precisely scans an incredible amount of zones across the entire image and adjusts brightness to deliver deeper darks and brighter whites. It virtually eliminates the "halo" effect and image distortion, so you’ll enjoy a crystal clear picture." maybe that is what used to call micro dimming ?
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN85HU8550FXZA

They also use Precision Black Local Dimming they say ,

Quote:
"Experience sharper contrast with Precision Black Local Dimming. It dims LEDs behind the darkest area of the picture for greater contrast and darker blacks, while the brighter elements remain as bright as they should be. Sit back and enjoy the picture." http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN85HU8550FXZA

PBL sounds a lot like FALD of or may be FALD looks like FALD to me (if it looks like a duck ) maybe the Samsung LCD Cognoscenti can elaborate on that for us . I was under the impression (perhaps incorrectly ) that Samsung did not make FALD sets it seems that may no longer be the the case at least with the Sammy 8550 LCD sets

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -

Last edited by tubetwister; 08-22-2014 at 12:15 PM.
tubetwister is online now  
post #234 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 12:14 PM
Senior Member
 
Hisma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 300 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubetwister View Post
T.T. here,
Samsung says they use UHD Dimming on the UHD 4K HU8550 Series Smart TV - 85” Class (84.5” Diag.) they say ,




They also use Precision Black Local Dimming they say ,




PBL sounds a lot like FALD of or may be FALD looks like FALD to me (if it looks like a duck ) maybe the Samsung LCD Cognoscenti can elaborate on that for us . I was under the impression (perhaps incorrectly ) that Samsung did not make FALD sets it seems that may no longer be the the case at least with the Sammy 8.5x sets
according to some hearsay from the shootout, the 85" 8550 is "direct lit" by 8 zones arranged as vertical strips.
Hisma is online now  
post #235 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 12:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 2,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hisma View Post
according to some hearsay from the shootout, the 85" 8550 is "direct lit" by 8 zones arranged as vertical strips.
8 zones why bother ? If that's case then I guess it's safe to assume they don't have what one would consider a true FALD
in the usual sense anyway . maybe I'll take a look at rtings.com they might have the info.

rtings .com did not review or discuss the 85" 8550 it might have an altogether different rear lit panel and/or at least different panel from the other edge lit 8550 sizes like the Sony 85" with the lone CMO panel in their stable may even be that panel also .

No real info about the Dimming specifically though just the name of it .


Seems like Cnet has turned into a TV review for dummies site lately (same for P.C.s ) although there are plenty worse ones. CBS/Cnet probably has the guys reviewing toasters ,vacuum cleaners and washing machines and all that other stuff in addition to the TV's now they are doing a rather poor job at emulating consumer reports these days half of their bloggers 'personalities' now rather than qualified techies ! I'm finding rtings .com and HDTVtest uk pretty useful these days though although Katzmaier isn't bad at times .

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -

Last edited by tubetwister; 08-22-2014 at 02:53 PM.
tubetwister is online now  
post #236 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 01:24 PM
Member
 
Matthias Hutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
But what I don't understand is why primaries that come nearer to the rec. 2020 gamut would have to be of narrower bandwidth. I'd think that giving the center frequency of a primary a more extreme value, without narrowing the bandwidth, would also move the primary toward the periphery of the CIE diagram.
You need saturated, purer, primary colors if you want to achieve more diverse "mixed" colors. (purer colors = narrow bandwidth)
No matter how many pastel colors you mix, you won't ever get rose red or neon green.
The only solution to be both broadband and have a large color gamut is to use more colors.
tubetwister likes this.
Matthias Hutter is offline  
post #237 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 02:23 PM
Senior Member
 
Bardia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Still wouldn't change my ZT65 for any of these. I shall wait a bit more....
tubetwister likes this.
Bardia is offline  
post #238 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 02:34 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,983
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post
Sir are you referring about this thread UHD/4K Quandary: To Buy or Not to Buy ?

Scott Wilkinson recommended 1080p also Imagic recommended 1080p.

who was the person disagreeing with every person the whole time?
This was not quite as black & white as you make it sound. Scott's 'recommendations' were a bit more nuanced than you made it sound and there were caveats.

Further, some of Scott's assumptions (timing of Rec2020 & the inevitability or timing of HDR) were refuted by no less than Joe Kane. I know of nobody in the video industry that's more in touch with both the feasibility and timing of new standards than Joe Kane.

So regardless of what Scott, Mark or anyone says, they are still just opinions. People need to determine their own needs, wants and desires and in conjunction with the gathering of both facts and the opinions of many people who you respect, arrive at a purchasing decision.

If I took the opinion of just one well respected calibrator (whom I too respect), I would never have sold my Kuro.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #239 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 03:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,119
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 295
I'm not against of 2160p ,I just don't see the point on buying a 2160p TV right now.Picture Quality is my priority and last those extra pixels, I hope that in the next years LCD make improvements in PQ other than just pixels.




For now seem that 2160p oled is going to be the way to go.






Edit: I will take Scott Wilkinson advice ,it seems more rational to me.

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000 /Sonos play:1 for bedrooms,kitchen,bathroom/Master bedroom Sonos sound bar/Sonos sub and Sonos play 1 surrounds.

Last edited by losservatore; 08-22-2014 at 06:59 PM.
losservatore is online now  
post #240 of 686 Old 08-22-2014, 04:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gmarceau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 58
The Samsung Galaxy Tab S seems to be getting a rave review for it's oled screen over at Display Mate (supposedly great rec. 709), just like the S5 smartphone, so I'm expecting Samsung has worked the kinks out for 2015/16 for their oled tv line.

An 11" oled from Sony ran for $2500 a few years back and today you can get a 10.5" oled tablet for a fifth of the price. I'm seriously considering picking one of these up just to watch movies that I can buy online. We don't have room for another tv and I don't want to pass up on some oled movie goodness, even if it's right up to my nose

"If you weren't such an ignorant troll, you'd be adorable" -rogo
gmarceau 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