AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › Sound Off: 4K (2160P) or whatever you care to call it, do we need it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sound Off: 4K (2160P) or whatever you care to call it, do we need it? - Page 12

post #331 of 385
1/28/13 at 8:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSony4KRises View Post

...

The Panny has 16bit color processing which at times even the 4K Sony fails to match.

...

That is very interesting. So any gamma/grayscale/gamut processing within the Panny would be free of banding. I'd love that.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #332 of 385
1/28/13 at 9:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

That is very interesting. So any gamma/grayscale/gamut processing within the Panny would be free of banding. I'd love that.

Just as JVC cornered the market in terms of supplying inky blacks and Sony with dynamic irises---Panasonic's color gradation is something to behold.
Reply
Reply
post #333 of 385
1/28/13 at 9:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSony4KRises View Post

Just as JVC cornered the market in terms of supplying inky blacks and Sony with dynamic irises---Panasonic's color gradation is something to behold.

I'm a JVC fan, but have run into its limitations. Somebody should combine all this great stuff. (Duh...) 4k resolution, 16 bit gradation, 120k native contrast... wow... how great would that be?
Reply
Reply
post #334 of 385
2/3/13 at 7:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by speedlaw View Post


The push for home 3D missed the fact that this person, who bought a new HD TV, doesn't expect to buy another for a long while...they might get a 3D for the replacement set, but it wasn't compelling enough to motivate the guy who JUST bought to go buy AGAIN.

The problem the TV makers miss is that once everyone bought a new set, they were DONE. The old SD sets lasted like a refrigerator...they didn't die, they just got demoted to the bedroom or garage. Now that HD sales went from high profit early adopter to middle profit mid market to no profit Wal Mart buyers, they need the next bump. We aren't the typical buyer, but even a geek like myself would not buy it...why go for a set that will have to scale when I have pixel for pixel already ?

There is a niche, for the guy with an 80 inch screen, but only if you can give him, as well, 4k content. This is a very small niche.

I would disagree with that
If what you say is the case then LED would not be the standard pretty much now for LCD

Unless there is significant part of the country that is still without an HD TV...based on the millions they sell every year there are a LOT of people that are consistently upgrading...People were not DONE
And the "small niche" as you call has been enough to drive a market that has all the signs of what I could call a commodity product

ie....cheaper every years( and better) and a throw away item because they are not built with repairing them in mind for the most part



Warren
Reply
Reply
post #335 of 385
2/3/13 at 11:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

I'm a JVC fan, but have run into its limitations. Somebody should combine all this great stuff. (Duh...) 4k resolution, 16 bit gradation, 120k native contrast... wow... how great would that be?

I would have to say that ultimately the Sony 4K comes close to satisfisfying all those needs.

But I think it is very important to re-iterate that 1080p/2K is still a fantastic format.

So even if 4K does become more prominent in the next few years I think there will be a peaceful and fruitful coexistance betweeen the 2 formats.

Growing up in the 80's it was painfully obviouse how limited the quality of VHS/Betamax/V2000/laserdisc was compared to 35/70mm.

DVD closed the gap between what could be seen at home and in the cineplex but BluRay equaled or surpassed it.

4K at home(and in cinemas) continues this trend.
Reply
Reply
post #336 of 385
2/3/13 at 12:13pm
Amazing isn't it? Image is still improving while music recorded 50 years ago can rival the better recordings of today.
Reply
Reply
post #337 of 385
2/3/13 at 2:22pm
How can the sound be improved? Any ideas?
Reply
Reply
post #338 of 385
2/3/13 at 4:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSony4KRises View Post

I would have to say that ultimately the Sony 4K comes close to satisfisfying all those needs.

But I think it is very important to re-iterate that 1080p/2K is still a fantastic format.

So even if 4K does become more prominent in the next few years I think there will be a peaceful and fruitful coexistance betweeen the 2 formats.

Growing up in the 80's it was painfully obviouse how limited the quality of VHS/Betamax/V2000/laserdisc was compared to 35/70mm.

DVD closed the gap between what could be seen at home and in the cineplex but BluRay equaled or surpassed it.

4K at home(and in cinemas) continues this trend.

Yes, I grew up in the 80's (and 70's) too. I didn't get interested in video presentation until BD and HD-DVD hit the scene. The previous stuff, DVD included, just looked like cr@p to me.

The Sony has 16 bit video processing? That would be sweet! I can't afford a $20k projector, but the first 1080p projector for the home was from Sony back in 2004 and it cost $29k! Look at how the price has dropped. So it'll come soon.
Reply
Reply
post #339 of 385
2/4/13 at 2:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McC View Post

How can the sound be improved? Any ideas?

Very simple. Stop compressing the music to death - the equipment available almost everywhere can give much better quality - if the music industry and the artists would understand it. It's ridicolous when people doing home recordings end up with better sound quality than that of world artists. Madonna's "5 seconds" is a favourite demo item on my behalf... that's about as long as it generally take people to hear how awful it sounds and beg to have it turned off. biggrin.gif
Reply
Reply
post #340 of 385
2/11/13 at 12:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnne1 View Post



Unless there is significant part of the country that is still without an HD TV...

I think there is....otherwise they will not be giving out those digital to analog converter boxes....
Reply
Reply
post #341 of 385
2/11/13 at 1:24pm
Of course there are probably a few people out there with black and white sets with no remote control.

On the same line of thought, my cable system, Verizon, still has half the cable channels in SD. Why not all HD by now?
Reply
Reply
post #342 of 385
2/12/13 at 1:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by durack View Post

I think there is....otherwise they will not be giving out those digital to analog converter boxes....

Most people have HD sets at this point, but a lot have TV's in the garage/spare bedroom, game room, guestroom, etc that are older SD sets.
Reply
Reply
post #343 of 385
3/4/13 at 10:14pm
I have stated elsewhere that 1080p via Blu Ray is a crap shoot. There are no guarantees that the transfers to blu ray (1080p) are any good. Similar for DVD that also suffers from certain businesses that do "dumps" to DVD rather than a thoughtful transfer.

Now we have Sony wanting to shove 4k when they still can't even give us consistently decent lower rez discs and streaming.

When 1080p discs (blu ray) are done well, presented on a good screen (be it plasma or via projector) it is a wonderful thing. Nothing is worse than being ripped off with crap transfers and it still goes on. Studios at times make no effort to make a quality product and we take our chances (unless some are wise enough to let others buy first and comment on the quality or a decent review such as what Ralph Potts provides).

Sony can keep their 4k and their 'BS-4" and I'll stick with my 1080p plasma, AVR, Blu Ray player. The other point is exactly how well will the 4k screens handle upscaling. This too will be a crap shoot.

When the studios start to guarantee a minimal standard for quality, then talk to the public. In the meanwhile, they'll continue to do whatever they want, cry foul when people try to archive their discs, and get greedier each and every day.
Reply
Reply
post #344 of 385
3/5/13 at 6:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrehdd View Post

I have stated elsewhere that 1080p via Blu Ray is a crap shoot. There are no guarantees that the transfers to blu ray (1080p) are any good. Similar for DVD that also suffers from certain businesses that do "dumps" to DVD rather than a thoughtful transfer.

Now we have Sony wanting to shove 4k when they still can't even give us consistently decent lower rez discs and streaming.

When 1080p discs (blu ray) are done well, presented on a good screen (be it plasma or via projector) it is a wonderful thing. Nothing is worse than being ripped off with crap transfers and it still goes on. Studios at times make no effort to make a quality product and we take our chances (unless some are wise enough to let others buy first and comment on the quality or a decent review such as what Ralph Potts provides).

Sony can keep their 4k and their 'BS-4" and I'll stick with my 1080p plasma, AVR, Blu Ray player. The other point is exactly how well will the 4k screens handle upscaling. This too will be a crap shoot.

When the studios start to guarantee a minimal standard for quality, then talk to the public. In the meanwhile, they'll continue to do whatever they want, cry foul when people try to archive their discs, and get greedier each and every day.

There is basically zero chance Sony's 4K movies will consist of bargain-bin quality transfers from the DVD era; it'll be a premium product for new releases, and a few re-releases that get the one-week IMAX screening like Titanic 3D and Top Gun 3D. If you don't want to spend the money to be an early adopter that's understandable, but there's no reason to doubt Sony's 4K EST product will set a new standard for quality in 2013.
Reply
Reply
post #345 of 385
3/5/13 at 6:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

There is basically zero chance Sony's 4K movies will consist of bargain-bin quality transfers from the DVD era; it'll be a premium product for new releases, and a few re-releases that get the one-week IMAX screening like Titanic 3D and Top Gun 3D. If you don't want to spend the money to be an early adopter that's understandable, but there's no reason to doubt Sony's 4K EST product will set a new standard for quality in 2013.

I hope your optimism is well founded and they have learned their lesson from the introduction of the last revolutionary upgrade in resolution... HD-DVD and Blu-ray. Original BD releases used codecs so poor that I chose HD-DVD. But HD-DVD wasn't without it's cr@ptastic releases either, notably The Fugitive. How could they ever have released something of that low quality? Now, all these years later, BD releases are usually pretty spectacular.

And, I think going from DVD to BD was more of a revolution than going from 2k to 4k will be. The BD revolution allowed me to have a "real" theater in my house with THX recommended viewing distances. It transformed my lifelong audio hobby into an audio/video hobby. BD took us from "television" to "movie theater". Heck... I don't even have a tuner hooked up in my theater. But the upgrade to 4k will only allow us to sit closer than 1sw (if we want to) in that same movie theater. I'm sure 4k will help even at 1sw, but you get my point.
Reply
Reply
post #346 of 385
3/8/13 at 11:22pm
We need to figure HD out before we move to the next thing. Comcast's HD compression is atrocious, as are a lot of other sources, and virtually nothing broadcast is 1080p. Once we get to really amazing 1080p throughout broadcast, then maybe we should talk about the next thing.
Reply
Reply
post #347 of 385
3/9/13 at 2:07am
Well, not all of us are interested in broadcast so that's not a general statement.
Reply
Reply
post #348 of 385
3/9/13 at 9:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Well, not all of us are interested in broadcast so that's not a general statement.

Do people not watch TV in Sweden??? Or does Europe not have the same compression problems we have in the states?
Reply
Reply
post #349 of 385
3/18/13 at 9:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post

Do people not watch TV in Sweden??? Or does Europe not have the same compression problems we have in the states?

Not all of us do. Most of it are poor produced american sitcoms, soaps and not very funny comedies, nothing worth wasting time on. wink.gif good series one can just as well buy on DVD and see when one likes to.

You can get HD though whatever way of 'downlink', but there's not that any channels that's invested in it. Don't think there are much compression issues for SD.
Reply
Reply
post #350 of 385
3/18/13 at 10:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Not all of us do. Most of it are poor produced american sitcoms, soaps and not very funny comedies, nothing worth wasting time on. wink.gif good series one can just as well buy on DVD and see when one likes to.

...

Completely agree. Many of us in the US don't watch TV either. I don't even have a cable connection to my theater, even thought the cable comes in and is distributed at the equipment room. Why bother? I watch local news at night and that's it.
Reply
Reply
post #351 of 385
3/22/13 at 3:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

Completely agree. Many of us in the US don't watch TV either. I don't even have a cable connection to my theater, even thought the cable comes in and is distributed at the equipment room. Why bother? I watch local news at night and that's it.

Most people in the US actually do watch TV. I don't watch a lot, but I do watch some. Plus live sports.
Reply
Reply
post #352 of 385
3/26/13 at 12:49pm
we all watch the TV, what is being displayed on it is another issue, whether that's cable, OTA, streaming, DVDs, etc...
Reply
Reply
post #353 of 385
3/26/13 at 1:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Hockey Guy View Post

we all watch the TV, what is being displayed on it is another issue, whether that's cable, OTA, streaming, DVDs, etc...

This really isn't true. When I watch a DVD or a Blu-ray disk I most definitely do not watch it on a TV, especially the Blu-rays.
Reply
Reply
post #354 of 385
3/26/13 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Hockey Guy View Post

we all watch the TV, what is being displayed on it is another issue, whether that's cable, OTA, streaming, DVDs, etc...

I'm talking about cable/OTA/sat. There is a small percentage of people in the US who don't have it, but it's just that- a small percentage.
Reply
Reply
post #355 of 385
3/27/13 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

This really isn't true. When I watch a DVD or a Blu-ray disk I most definitely do not watch it on a TV, especially the Blu-rays.

You get the point - TV is being mislabeled as content, not the display device it is. If you watch on a computer monitor or projector it's still a display device just like the HDTVs.
Reply
Reply
post #356 of 385
3/27/13 at 5:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Hockey Guy View Post

You get the point - TV is being mislabeled as content, not the display device it is. If you watch on a computer monitor or projector it's still a display device just like the HDTVs.

In this day and age, the only differentiator is having an ATSC-8VSB/ATSC-QAM/NTSC tuner, as flat panel TVs and monitors are basically the same except what sorts of ports you can feed them with...
Reply
Reply
post #357 of 385
3/28/13 at 1:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Hockey Guy View Post

You get the point - TV is being mislabeled as content, not the display device it is. If you watch on a computer monitor or projector it's still a display device just like the HDTVs.

Mislabled? Tele-Vision. To see from a distance. It's definitely broadcast media it refers to.
Edited by Nightlord - 3/28/13 at 2:07am
Reply
Reply
post #358 of 385
3/28/13 at 12:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

Mislabled? Tele-Vision. To see from a distance. It's definitely broadcast media it refers to.

Really. I didn't know Best Buy was broadcasting now.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/TV-Video/Televisions/abcat0101000.c?id=abcat0101000

And by his own admission, he was referring to OTA/Cable/Sat only one of which is specifically what you are trying to define at the old term of OTA or tele-vision. The medium is broadcasting, the device is a TV or HDTV
Quote:
def. -A box-shaped device that receives television signals and reproduces them on a screen

So by your definition, if you're watching TV, what are you watching it on?
Quote:
The broadcast television system is typically disseminated via radio transmissions on designated channels in the 54–890 MHz frequency band.

Good luck watching cable or satellite on those frequencies.
Edited by HD Hockey Guy - 3/28/13 at 12:25pm
Reply
Reply
post #359 of 385
3/28/13 at 12:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Hockey Guy View Post

Really. I didn't know Best Buy was broadcasting now.

I'm certain they weren't around when television was invented. They're just a confused and helping to speard the confusion. A CRT, a plasma or LCD are just tools for displaying television. "Swedish Television" isn't a manufacturer of tv-sets in your sense, it's the national broadcasting service here.

There's a similar confusion happening with people saying CD about CD-players and hifi about the equipment. I've even heard people saying CD-discs...
Reply
Reply
post #360 of 385
4/20/13 at 2:52pm
To get this thread back on topic....

I have spent some time recently (a week ago) with a Sony 84" running an Oppo BDP-103 . Got to play around with the combination for hours; using different BR material, try the native blu-ray resolution, let the TV upconvert it, let the Oppo upconvert it, different display modes, tried 3D-mode using the passive Sony glasses, played video games on it...really gave them both a good workout.

Guys, depending on how far away you sit and the size of your screen, Quad-HD rocks. IMHO, it's a must-have for passive 3D. And the Oppo 4K-upscaling is superior and very noticeable when viewed from 8 to 10 feet away, and obvious from closer up.

And native 4K content in 3D is like...holey moley. Stunning. Gave me the Big Want. rolleyes.gif

Honestly, that Oppo player impressed me as much as the monster Sony panel. Together, wow. Now the panel needs to come down an order of magnitude in price, is all... ;-)

But that Oppo is worth it's price now, if you are running a 4K display of any size, again IMHO.

So, 'need' it? For passive 3D, definitely. Got a big screen & close seating? Then yessir, 4K is for you.

'Want' it? Oh my, yes...
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Community News & Polls

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › Sound Off: 4K (2160P) or whatever you care to call it, do we need it?