AVS Forum banner

Consumer Reports: LG 55EC9300 "Isn't the Best TV We've Ever Tested."

101K views 1K replies 112 participants last post by  kucharsk 
#1 · (Edited)
Consumer Reports: LG 55EC9300 "Isn't the Best TV We've Ever Tested"



LG's second-generation 55-inch 1080p OLED HDTV offers a glimpse of the near future, when OLEDs will be the best TVs available—but that's not quite yet.


-------

Consumer Reports reviewed the $3500 LG 55EC9300 and found much to like. Deep black levels and the resulting high contrast beat anything offered by LED-LCD or plasma panels. However, issues with color accuracy and gamma tracking kept it from earning the top spot for all-around best TV.

"LG’s 55EC9300 OLED TV is a top-performing 1080p set, and certainly ranks among the best TVs we’ve ever tested. It's worth noting that under normal viewing, many people won't notice the flaws we point out in this review. But even with some of the noted shortcomings of this set, it's clear to us that OLED will quickly emerge as the top display technology for those who care about top-notch television picture quality." —James K. Willcox and Claudio Ciacci, Consumer Reports



Claudio Ciacci compares black levels on LG's OLED (left) and an LED-LCD (right) - Photo from Consumer Reports

The review mirrors my observations and experience with the EC9300; it can look very impressive, but it also suffers from some visible flaws. I'm looking forward to Consumer Report's review of the soon-to-ship LG 65EC9700 OLED UHDTV. It's about time a TV definitively pushes the state of the art in flat (and curved) panel displays forward; the EC9300 came close to pulling it off.


Like AVS Forum on Facebook
Follow AVS Forum on Twitter
+1 AVS Forum on Google+
 
See less See more
2
#560 ·
I agree, there's lots at play here.

A 5K digital stills camera vs the human eye.

Heavy amounts of JPEG compression.

Plus of course another display in the mix. Are you viewing on 13 inch LCD from 1ft? 64inch plasma from 7ft? 4inch iPhone from 6 inches?

It opens up a question if screenshots are ever of any use to show a displays qualities and flaws.

You'll never capture the perfect blacks or contrast ratio of OLED. And the same you can never really capture the great motion on plasma.

It's like people that record their expensive speakers and recordings on youtube. Which bring a slew of bemusing comments of 'sounds great' :D

There's no replacement than seeing a screen for yourself and deciding if it's the right one for you.

I do think though that my stills give a more objective look at the fixed DNR than the hdtvtest example. I at least show a full scale image which I think gives a more accurate perspective, not just a 10% crop of the screen. It doesn't hide the issue; to the contrary I find it much more visible in these stills than normally viewing content. But it doesn't exaggerate or blow it up either.

Funnily enough my photos have shifted the discussion to the pixel structure of the display, which I have maintained from the start more negatively impacts PQ than the DNR. It's not really an issue unless you're view graphics or still images but it's something that the more 'observant' professional reviewers never seem to mention.
 
#590 ·
I'm not going to be taking any more photos. It's a time consuming dull process.

What I will say though is that in all the comparisons I've put up I can tell which has DNR and which doesn't. The exception being the close-up of the charcoal-ed face.

Despite all the sensor artefacts I see the DNR easier in these stills than I do physically watching and changing between inputs.

If you need artefact free close-ups to see the DNR then I suggest you wouldn't find DNR damaging PQ significantly in real world use.
 
#592 · (Edited)
I'm not going to be taking any more photos. It's a time consuming dull process.

What I will say though is that in all the comparisons I've put up I can tell which has DNR and which doesn't. The exception being the close-up of the charcoal-ed face.

Despite all the sensor artefacts I see the DNR easier in these stills than I do physically watching and changing between inputs.

If you need artefact free close-ups to see the DNR then I suggest you wouldn't find DNR damaging PQ significantly in real world use.
I agree shooting a TV screen is drag. I can also "see through" the artifacts, and the resolution loss from DNR is evident. There seems to be agreement on that point. My concern was the discussion would turn to the visibility of the pixel structure, when the reality is that's never going to be accurately portrayed through a digital photograph. :) I didn't want the discussion to become about that. Pixel grid/structure was the last thing I was thinking about last time I saw a EC9300.
 
#600 ·
^ And your point is after posting this twice? This is nothing new.

The pix in the review and Bob's pix were both taken to illustrate the 'non-defearable' DNR, which actually is, apparently, defeatable in PC mode.

You might have mentioned that the DNR is defeatable by switching to PC mode...but that would have been a positive. We don't want any of that. ;)
 
#601 · (Edited)
Since the pictures themselves are a comparison of DNR on and off, then it's self evident the NR is defeatable. It's the caveat from the review that matters...

"As is the case with nearly all LG displays, this behavior can be defeated if you label the HDMI input as “PC” and send 60hz video to the TV, which enables a more processing-light display mode designed for use with computers. That means that you’ll have to kiss goodbye to native 24p playback and put up with 60hz pulldown judder, and you’ll also have to tolerate the fact that the PC mode has less accurate color. Still, being able to toggle between these two sets of compromises allows us to present a comparison of the LG EC9300 showing the opening montage from the Spears & Munsil Blu-ray Disc, taken off-screen with a locked-off professional camera:" - HDTVtest


The real point is there's no mode on the EC9300 that supports true 24p playback of untouched, pristine 1080p. It's that absence of DNR in PC mode that serves as elegant proof it in undefeatable in the other modes.
 
#611 ·
where's the 600 post thread about the "best picture quality ever" review? :rolleyes:

I think it's interesting that although in an obvious response to that particular review title, consumer reports made the effort to word their title to "isn't the best tv we've tested"

I agree with both.

It's not the best tv ever. But it is the best PQ.
It really isn't or are you saying the HDTVtest review was wrong?
 
#618 · (Edited)
I had a chance to calibrate LG's new to the USA flat OLED, the 55EA8800. I am happy to report that the near black uniformity issue where shadow detail was uneven across the screen is gone in the flat EA8800. :) So it appears that it was caused by the curve. With careful calibration, shadow detail is great.

In addition, there was no issue reducing the blue white balance as has been reported here by others. I looked for banding and color shading problems, but all I saw was the expected yellowing of an image caused by a white balance deficient in blue. I suspected that from my experiences with the 9800 and 9300, but I confirmed it today on the 8800.

The CMS still causes horrible color issues.

If calibrated with precision and LOTS of patience, the 8800 can have a very smooth, neutral grayscale, perfect blacks, and great shadow detail simultaneously. I am still annoyed that the 20 step control displaces as soon as the contrast is reduced enough to show any WTW headroom and have the best gamut luminance performance, though.

I almost hate to bring it up but yes, I believe I did see the effects of the undefeatable NR. Some BD material I knew had quite a bit of film grain from seeing it on many other calibrated sets looked cleaner than I was used to seeing. The effect was subtle from the viewing position but became more obvious when I walked up close to the TV.
 
#619 ·
I had a chance to calibrate LG's new to the USA flat OLED, the 55EA8800. I am happy to report that the near black uniformity issue where shadow detail was uneven across the screen is gone in the flat EA8800. :) So it appears that it was caused by the curve. With careful calibration, shadow detail is great.

In addition, there was no issue reducing the blue white balance as has been reported here by others. I looked for banding and color shading problems, but all I saw was the expected yellowing of an image caused by a white balance deficient in blue. I suspected that from my experiences with the 9800 and 9300, but I confirmed it today on the 8800.

The CMS still causes horrible color issues.

If calibrated with precision and LOTS of patience, the 8800 can have a very smooth, neutral grayscale, perfect blacks, and great shadow detail simultaneously.

I almost hate to bring it up but yes, I believe I did see the effects of the undefeatable NR. Some BD material I knew had quite a bit of film grain from seeing it on many other calibrated sets looked cleaner than I was used to seeing. The effect was subtle from the viewing position but became more obvious when I walked up close to the TV.
You know, if that's true then I'd just like to note that there's no request that Scott and I have communicated more clearly to LG than the need for flat OLEDs. And if the curve is the cause of the non-uniformity, then the curve has to go—now more than ever. I wish there was a way to confirm that.
 
#633 ·
Let's not jump the gun, please. Chad noted the difference in uniformity between the sample flat screen he calibrated and the sample curve screen he calibrated. That's one sample of each. Owners have chimed in that uniformity varied (as it does with all techs) with curved models, from very good to not so good.

So pending further samples, I would be reluctant to generalize 'curve vs non-curved' based on one sample from each. I'd bet Chad would agree.
 
#643 ·
I'd hate to wrestle with the definition of 'faithfully reproduce video'. There's another statement that could be construed by newbies as something akin to 'Can this thing even display a picture I'd recognize'?

A strict definition of 'faithfully' might preclude almost every display ever made. ;)

Just sayin. :)
 
#653 ·
I think you've got to accept that, with so many people holding a view that the
EC9300 offers unparalleled TV quality, that those people, backed by the opinions
of some reviewers, are entitled to hold that opinion
.

You see there we go again with views and opinions...............I am going with quantifiable facts on this one. This tv is doing things it shouldn't and that is undeniable.
 
#688 ·
And as I've said before, one could most certainly argue how 'serious' those things are. There is no 'fact' as to how the viewer sees these things on an individual basis, only opinion. There are plenty of TVs that do things they shouldn't. Perspective.

It seems some like to quote the reviews that cast doubt on the display and those are viewed as 'fact'. Those reviews that call it the 'best ever' seem to be labeled as 'opinions'. I'm amused with how that works.
 
#685 ·
They'll have to orientate themselves to do so. And that's the first and last time I'll ever use that word. It's now in the dictionary, thanks to @#$%ing common usage, and no longer tagged as "substandard".
 
  • Like
Reactions: mo949
#686 ·
imagic;28753 482 said:
But it exhibits non-defeatable DNY when it is doing so. That's the whole point of this exercise. You have to choose—PC mode and no DNR or modes that support all frame rates, with DNR.
Once again, the need to put things in perspective. Most of us agreed that the impact of DNR was very slight at the worst, certainly at typical viewing distances. This was proven by a number of pictures as well as owner reports.

To read some of these posts (not yours), you'd think that most detail was obliterated by DNR. If this thread or any thread is to serve any purpose to those considering this display, there is a crying need to put things in perspective.

Yes DNR exists. No, it doesn't have a dramatic impact on PQ.

If the purpose of this thread is to dissuade people from buying the display, carry on.
 
#687 ·
Once again, the need to put things in perspective. Most of us agreed that the impact of DNR was very slight at the worst, certainly at typical viewing distances. This was proven by a number of pictures as well as owner reports.

To read some of these posts (not yours), you'd think that most detail was obliterated by DNR. If this thread or any thread is to serve any purpose to those considering this display, there is a crying need to put things in perspective.

Yes DNR exists. No, it doesn't have a dramatic impact on PQ.

If the purpose of this thread is to dissuade people from buying the display, carry on.
:confused:

$3500 for a 55-inch TV and the fact it only does 1080p is what's going to dissuade people, neither of which are flaws. An endless argument about a technical detail that is of no interest to the average consumer, buried in page 23 of these comments... that's not going to affect anything. I agree that most people will not see the issue and will not care about it, either. Just like most people don't care about music that's both dynamically compressed and subjected to lossy compression. If it sounds good to them through a pair of Beats, that's good enough.
 
#694 · (Edited)
Mark was talking about 24fps. I meantioned that Katzmaier noticed that 1080p24 sources introduced to much judder. What are you? The thread police?[/B]

No. But I do question the value of quoting reviews we've all read.

My opinion is that it is way to early to buy a OLED TV. I made that choice a few months ago and bought a Plasma instead :)

Good for you. Enjoy the plasma. It's a great TV.

Looks like you are basically saying is that i need to own a LG OLED if i want to make some comments about it.

To make informed comments and progress discussion, yes. Or at least to have spent a decent amount of time with one in a controlled environment.

I wouldn't fly a plane just because I read the manual.

All my comments are based on my day to day work with a panasonic VT60 a professional Sony OLED monitor, and of course owning and living with the LG OLED.

I can talk about any TV i want, i do not need to own a TV first to be aloud to talk about it. And i do not need your permission if i want to talk about the EC9300.

Of course you can, but don't expect anyone to listen to you if all your experience of it is reading what others thought about it.

I can quote any reviewer i want, whenever i want. You already expressed how you feel about reviewers. ''By sitting 6 inches from screen carefully looking for any imperfections. God bless their soul. This thread is about what Consumer Report reviewers had to say about the EC9300.

I think reviewers have a really tough job. As we can see in this thread that every word is picked over with a fine-tooth comb. Semantics are everything. The way we measure picture quality IS subjective, no matter how much people want to measure it. The final decision should always be made with your own eyes and making the decision based on what you prefer.

Since you do not take pro-reviews serious, why are YOU even in this thread??''

But I do take them seriously. I tend to read all reviews before purchasing something, shortlist the options I think sound appealing to me, and then I go and look at them all and make my own decision.

Anyway. You took my comment out of context. It was specifically about DNR, and the severity of its impact on PQ.

The reason I'm here is to provide another opinion, not repeat others.

I'm not a professional reviewer but I am a professional in production. I've been shooting 4K RED since 2010. Still keep 16mm alive. And continue to shoot productions on 35mm and Alexa. I do all my final post-production at Framestore (Gravity, Harry Potter etc)

Working in the industry has made me product agnostic. There's always something better along the way. I tend to care about what gives me results right now and when it comes to TV's the issues that affect me from where I sit, not measurements beyond what our eyes can see. Something I think many of the more technical reviews sadly lose sight of.

I've tried to shed some light on just HOW damaging the DNR is.

I can try and shed light on HOW damaging colour accuracy is.

The same for black detail or uniformity or IR or burn-in.

Reviewers often don't have to live with these TVs for more than a few days. Owners can give a valuable second wave of information from prolonged use.
 
#704 ·
Looks like you are basically saying is that i need to own a LG OLED if i want to make some comments about it.

To make informed comments and progress discussion, yes. Or at least to have spent a decent amount of time with one in a controlled environment.

I wouldn't fly a plane just because I read the manual.
so this TV is a plane and any other is a car or what?
sorry to say this we all have a TV so we all can fly this plane.
with other words.
this TV is just one more plane we can buy nothing else.
and I'm pretty sure I can use this TV without the Manuel. yeah right, I'm that good!
OLED screens aren't rocket science...

I think reviewers have a really tough job. As we can see in this thread that every word is picked over with a fine-tooth comb. Semantics are everything. The way we measure picture quality IS subjective, no matter how much people want to measure it. The final decision should always be made with your own eyes and making the decision based on what you prefer.
so quality is subjective?
of cause you choice for yourself what's the best TV out there no question, but this is not the point. the point is the question "is the EC9300 the best screen based on objective measuring" or with other words is this screen best in recreating the creators intend?
the answer to this question from me is no.

now we can argue about the important of black deeps (this TV is very good in this part no doubt) but how important is this when the CMS can't even hit D65? for the subjective opinion on this not at all. but look at this objectively.

the best screen out there has to be objectively the best screen out there not someone opinion. at least in my point of view.
 
#706 ·
TGM, I don't think Bob is implying that being an owner is of 'unlimited value', but an owner might be able to provide insight into the pros & cons of PQ better than non-owners cruising the internet.

I highly value the opinions of owners...particularly those that I've known for years here on AVS.
 
#707 ·
sorry to say this we all have a TV so we all can fly this plane.
with other words.
this TV is just one more plane we can buy nothing else.
and I'm pretty sure I can use this TV without the Manuel. yeah right, I'm that good!
OLED screens aren't rocket science...


I take your point. :cool:

But how can you comment on the pictures quality if you've only read about it? If you read something like 'judder'... what does that mean? How much judder? Is it sticking every two frames? Once every 5 seconds? Only on specific pans? Is it 100% not from the content? etc

We should question everything we read. Even test results (especially motion resolution ones :roll eyes: )

so quality is subjective?
of cause you choice for yourself what's the best TV out there no question, but this is not the point. the point is the question "is the EC9300 the best screen based on objective measuring" or with other words is this screen best in recreating the creators intend?
the answer to this question from me is no.

now we can argue about the important of black deeps (this TV is very good in this part no doubt) but how important is this when the CMS can't even hit D65? for the subjective opinion on this not at all. but look at this objectively.


And that's an interesting debate. What's more important? Colour or Black level?

As a creator I believe black level is. When I set a grade with a colourist the first thing we do is sit our blacks. When you watch a grade back it's the easiest thing to spot if black level and contrast fluctuate at all. It's the basis of everything... and if display (A) lifts that black level, it's instantly noticeable.

So it's more important than CMS to me. Our eyes our relatively useless at noticing colour inaccuracy. This isn't subjective. They just are. Colourists always tell me to stop looking at the most accurate screen available and say its "not accurate"... of course what he means is my eyes aren't accurate and to trust his scopes.

So to answer your question, for me it is.

My opinion of course. That's all I'm putting out.

the best screen out there has to be objectively the best screen out there not someone opinion. at least in my point of view.

And as no TV is 'best' in every category, no TV can be labelled the best. Just best for you.
 
#709 ·
I take your point. :cool:

But how can you comment on the pictures quality if you've only read about it? If you read something like 'judder'... what does that mean? How much judder? Is it sticking every two frames? Once every 5 seconds? Only on specific pans? Is it 100% not from the content? etc

We should question everything we read. Even test results (especially motion resolution ones :roll eyes: )
I never talked about this judder there are no hard numbers or test that result in numbers high speed camera recordings of this.
the motion blur is a hole different topic this is easy to test (testufo.com if you want to give it a try) and we have science. this OLED is a sample and hold. every hold and sample display has terrible bad motion resolution as long as nothing like BFI is used. with other words this Display has not as good motion as hold and sample Displays with a flawless BFI and of cause refresh type displays.

still fine to argue how bad it really is there are more motion problems like response time motion issue. but this display has 300 lanes without interpolation like every other LCD screen for 250 bucks out there.

And that's an interesting debate. What's more important? Colour or Black level?

As a creator I believe black level is. When I set a grade with a colourist the first thing we do is sit our blacks. When you watch a grade back it's the easiest thing to spot if black level and contrast fluctuate at all. It's the basis of everything... and if display (A) lifts that black level, it's instantly noticeable.

So it's more important than CMS to me. Our eyes our relatively useless at noticing colour inaccuracy. This isn't subjective. They just are. Colourists always tell me to stop looking at the most accurate screen available and say its "not accurate"... of course what he means is my eyes aren't accurate and to trust his scopes.

So to answer your question, for me it is.

My opinion of course. That's all I'm putting out.
the error of this screen is way more than a delta e of 3 so it is totally obvious they even go over 14 yes hdtvtest says over 14 delta e.
and I don't think the talk about black is over with a theoretical black of 0 cm2
how big is the step from 0 to 1 and so on is this totally linear to the gamma curve?
and this is not the only OLED on the market with 0 cm2 black there ware some with a better CMS and better motion.
And as no TV is 'best' in every category, no TV can be labelled the best. Just best for you.
the best screen out there is the best screen that can do perfect BT 709 (at least in this year) has as little motion blur as possible and doesn't touch the picture at all with the deepest black possible.
 
#715 ·
Well, I should have 55EC9300 "the best TV We've Ever Tested" tomorrow.

Did the 9800 also have the DNR issue? If it did, I would find it pretty damn funny that nobody bitched and moaned about it, and it was called the best TV EVER by almost every major publication, and now DNR is such a big deal?

I would 100% prefer the option to turn it off, but even you could never turn it off, the 9800 (if it suffered from DNR) was BY FAR the best flat panel TV I've ever seen/owned.

Still gonna get the 65" 4k when it comes out, but thats gonna be at least 5 months for me.

Also, I don't know how people can say that Panny and Samsung plasmas have great blacks. They are not even close to black, and at best a darker shade of grey. Plasma glow is highly annoying and I've seen them all, except a modified Kuro. The closest I ever came to black on non OLED was my JVC RS4910, which I found to have MUCH better dark grey then the VT60.

Reason I went with 9300 this time was because of supposed better input lag and 3D.
 
#719 ·
Did the 9800 also have the DNR issue? If it did, I would find it pretty damn funny that nobody bitched and moaned about it, and it was called the best TV EVER by almost every major publication, and now DNR is such a big deal?
AFAICT, DNR was an issue for some, but ballooned into this enormous "big deal" once people started drawing lines in the sand and defending their own turf.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top