Sony Crystal LED Display - new display tech - Page 14

Does 4K LCD suck?

(?????) Of course it does. What's the name of this thread again?

4K is currently a "massive factor" in making any display, even LCD. Now it is you who are bringing up obvious facts.

Where did you pull this one from?

Rogo has been carefully listing out how Crystal LED isn't there yet, and he's also pointed out how there's no established way to make it either. There's nothing that shows Sony can do this at HD, let alone 4K.

The "ta da" moment was 2012.

Oh, like how you decided that "the 3D fad is over"??? What sales/marketing trend are you pointing to for that one? You should re-read rogo's points again. I'm personally hoping that Sony keeps at least some of their eggs in the Crystal basket, but you're not making any kind of cogent argument either way.
Edited by tgm1024 - 1/14/13 at 6:23am

Someone remove the S, U, C, K, and X from that man's keyboard.....

Nevertheless, the way LG themselves are issuing their own strong caveat about BI/IR seems to me to leave the door open at least a little wider for less fragile technologies. I hope Sony pursues Crystal, even if it's a naive pie in the sky hope for the impossible: a bullet-proof display.

tgm1024 just because someone has 28k posts, does not mean you have to act like such a sycophant. I have been reading Rogo's posts for years and he is so bored they now devolve into disagreeing with anybody for the sake of it. Dont you do the same.


Do you think Sony just pulled that display together in the months leading up to CES 2012? The project would have started in 2010 at the latest, probably years earlier even. The point I am making is this.... around that time it was not obvious 1080p was going to be superceded in the highend flatpanel segment.


I may have been flippant refering to 3D as a fad, its not from a technological or consumer standpoint. But it is for the manufacturers marketing departments, at least until non glasses 3D appears. By 2009 the TV manufacturers were looking for a new edge to get people to upgrade their old flat panels. This 3D phase 2010-2013 has ended and 4K will be the next push.


Perhaps you missed the part where Rogo tells me 4K has NOTHING to do with CLED not appearing, which is what I was responding to. And then I am being scolded to read his words carefully....


This sort of stuff is exactly what i mean when people are being ridiculous and trying to create arguements out of thin air.
Edited by Agisthos - 1/14/13 at 6:40am

Sycophant? Now you're making at least 5 people here, and even Rogo laugh. Rogo and I don't see eye to eye on many things, and he and I have certainly gone to the mat. But your post wandered all over the place, as I detailed out. And then *you* talk about arguments out of thin air.....Oh man.....

As far as this point goes: I didn't miss that at all. His point is that CLED couldn't appear even at 2K (he's been consistent in this regard). A prototype does not mean that it can be made as a product. I'm not going to re-list his reasons why this is, it's his position after all and not entirely mine, but you took that and ran with it as if he was somehow saying that 4K isn't harder than 2K. He was saying that it has nothing to do with the fact that CLED had no chance of being made regardless.
Edited by tgm1024 - 1/14/13 at 7:29am

That was none other then their COO Phil Molyneux.It will be easier to make larger size crystal LED panels then trying to make a smaller one with very high pixel density.

Easier being a relative term for which there is little frame of reference aside from the existence of a single prototype....

I still have my hopes up for Crystal, even if there's no chance. What I do see on the horizon though are people attaching IR to OLED someday as strongly and immovably as they have around plasma, if they don't fix this. It's very frustrating in this day and age to still be told things like "Thanks for your $12,000, but be careful what you display, you could easily ruin your set".

Well Sony are using Quantum Dots with their upcoming X9000A range, so I guess we know the answer there. Unless you are talking about a QD LED display.
Whether burn-in can happen is not really a concern. How burn-in can happen is the issue. With CRTs, each "pixel" was lit for a very short time, and the intensity was variable. For a brighter pixel, it would be hit with more energy, for a lower brightness, it would be hit will less energy. This meant that CRTs (at least in later years) were very resilient to burn-in.

Plasma only ever lights their cells at 100% brightness, and varies the brightness of a pixel by changing the length of time it is lit for. Plasmas also have a higher duty cycle than CRT, and so they have the pixels lit for a longer period of time.

With OLED, I think we have a return to pixels with a variable brightness, but duty cycle depends on how the manufacturer wants to drive the display (lower duty cycle = better motion, but more flicker, and requires a higher brightness)


I was never concerned with, and never experienced burn-in with CRT. With Plasma, image retention/burn-in is relatively easy to produce. I suspect OLED will be somewhere in-between the two, and will hopefully approach CRT-levels of resistance as the technology matures.

I really hope they don't go the Pioneer route of dimming the display when they detect there are static elements on-screen, because I found that very annoying.

I had to go back and read why you replied to my post with a response that honestly made no sense to me. Now I see your argument. It's interesting but still not especially relevant.

There was never a plan to make CLED TVs. This has nothing to do with 4K.

I think the marketing potential for this is far smaller than you do.

I'm pretty sure TGM isn't sucking up to me. And I'm also quite certain that Sony was aware of 4K a long time before you think they were. They hitched their digital cinema wagon to almost immediately, have had 4K projectors in the marketplace for more than a half decade, etc.

I know you think they hoped CLED was the future of TVs. That's not what happened. Someone at Sony thought, "Hey, we can try to repurpose these LED modules into a TV, should we try?" And they tried. And it proved nice, but unmanufacturable. And that was that. It's fascinating you think they spent years working on that prototype; I'm pretty confident it was far less.

Stop sucking up to me! :
Well, at least my point was coherent enough to be understood even by people who don't agree with it.

How many years of suffering will we have to endure with 4K LCD until 4K OLED is the same price? That is the ultimate question.

People here who are so smart can't answer simple questions like that.

Makes you think that they are just part of the AV Display sales force!

I think their answer would be: buy both technologies and spend trillions--don't worry--we'll never compare them!

Fine. 6 years, 247 days, 3 hours, and 10 minutes. More or less.

Thought it was 267 days rather than 247. Beats me.

6 years, 247 days, 3 hours and 10 minutes of the horror of LCD!

Finally someone here admits to the LCD horror gap that I've been saying all along.

How many years, days, hours, and minutes do we pretend that LCD is better than OLED?

Will we hear that old favorite that's been used here at the forum since its inception: "Well each technology has its plusses and minuses--it's whatever is in the person's eyes that count."

Does that sound like enthusiast or sales force?