or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Sony UHDTVs at CES 2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony UHDTVs at CES 2014 - Page 6

post #151 of 577

Another screengrab, the source video is in 4k:

http://i.imgur.com/KGz48KI.jpg

post #152 of 577
Most TVs are already bulkier at the bottom though it isn't visible on the outer most edges of the bezel. This is a clever design to get the best sound without needing to add a sound bar.
post #153 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricfutures View Post

Most TVs are already bulkier at the bottom though it isn't visible on the outer most edges of the bezel. This is a clever design to get the best sound without needing to add a sound bar.

I think it looks uglier then hell if you ask me. From the side Sony's tv's look like a big wedge. Sorry but I hate the 2014 designs.
post #154 of 577
A closer look at the 85X95:



www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qzuUqMlMxk
post #155 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricfutures View Post

Most TVs are already bulkier at the bottom though it isn't visible on the outer most edges of the bezel. This is a clever design to get the best sound without needing to add a sound bar.

That's the way I look at it. Much better than having a soundbar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

I think it looks uglier then hell if you ask me. From the side Sony's tv's look like a big wedge. Sorry but I hate the 2014 designs.

"Function" over "Form". Aesthetics.....trick people into getting a lesser quality product so often. So many people will choose a Mercedes Benz over a BMW 3 because of something like "the interior looks better" or the exterior design itself, tho the 3 Series has won best car in its class for... I believe 23 years now.
You may spend more money and still have a lesser product if you go for Form over Function. The opinion will never degrade the fact that it is a better product, and I thought anyone would rather a couple more inches in thickness at the bottom than 5 or more inches tall & 40" plus wide soundbar that doesn't always sync properly, and certainly does not have the TVs same matching audio engine & makes a sort of echo effect if both the TV & soundbar are running.

If you have surround sound, I am certainly in agreement, as the sound for the Television would be of no purpose.

I'm personally more aggravated that we don't get any local dimming whatsoever except for the most expensive 4K unit, which the SONY rep grinned and said would cost "10's of thousands". Now we still have to worry about banding from Edge Lit TVs. That's what will keep me from buying a 2014. If they didn't figure out a trick to rid of all vertical banding (any banding of course) then it really disappoints me to spend $3K on the only 1080 unit with X-tended Dynamic, or any 4K unit that doesn't have the PRO Version of X-tended Dynamic, and I'm afraid only the wealthy will affor a PRO with FALD :'-(
post #156 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by HYMER DAXTER View Post

Hi! I found picture in this video :



Thanks for posting the video. Im going to struggle with these TVs as it's immediately visible on the wall down the hall way from the front door.
post #157 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by skatsa View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by HYMER DAXTER View Post

Hi! I found picture in this video :



Thanks for posting the video. Im going to struggle with these TVs as it's immediately visible on the wall down the hall way from the front door.

Nice promotional tool from Sony for sure. But there's no struggle for me because I think my Sony HX850 delivers the same kind of beautiful PQ as the 4K sets do. But thats just me.
post #158 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

I think it looks uglier then hell if you ask me. From the side Sony's tv's look like a big wedge. Sorry but I hate the 2014 designs.

I personally don't have a problem with a bulky bottom, from an aesthetics standpoint, but functionally, it interferes with the amount of downward tilt possible when wall-mounted.
post #159 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by LookN2Find View Post

I'm personally more aggravated that we don't get any local dimming whatsoever except for the most expensive 4K unit, which the SONY rep grinned and said would cost "10's of thousands". Now we still have to worry about banding from Edge Lit TVs. That's what will keep me from buying a 2014. If they didn't figure out a trick to rid of all vertical banding (any banding of course) then it really disappoints me to spend $3K on the only 1080 unit with X-tended Dynamic, or any 4K unit that doesn't have the PRO Version of X-tended Dynamic, and I'm afraid only the wealthy will affor a PRO with FALD :'-(

If true, it doesn't surprise me. Sony are ever-willing to heavily compromise all but their top one or two models. Their 1080p sets have been getting worse, IMO, in recent years and it's a case of no corner goes uncut as they desperately pinch a penny here and there.

On the 1080p sets over here:

FALD: gone
Gorilla glass/opti-contrast panel: gone
Metal foot: gone plastic

Even the 55" X900 has a cheapo plastic back. For the price they charge, really, I would expect more.
post #160 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post

If true, it doesn't surprise me. Sony are ever-willing to heavily compromise all but their top one or two models. Their 1080p sets have been getting worse, IMO, in recent years and it's a case of no corner goes uncut as they desperately pinch a penny here and there.

On the 1080p sets over here:

FALD: gone
Gorilla glass/opti-contrast panel: gone
Metal foot: gone plastic

Even the 55" X900 has a cheapo plastic back. For the price they charge, really, I would expect more.

Yep, I get the feeling that the 2014 Sony sets will be as high (and higher for larger sets) as last year's 4k release sets. The announcements from CES have been puzzling and discouraging for me. I just want a passive 3D, 4k set with preferably a 70-75" screen with FALD and improved viewing angles. It's strike three and a darn shame for me as I've not read about any manufacturer that has those features in one set. Very disappointing.
post #161 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

That's, of course, far more true on a curved set, which just looks awful when mounted.

And, honestly, it's true on most articulating mounts anyway.

To stick with a theme, I have 99 problems, and this doesn't feel like one of them.
I agree, curved is no good either.......

About the video, I have not been that moved in some time, that was unit I powered on a OLED........Now that is jaw dropping.
post #162 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by LookN2Find View Post

I'm personally more aggravated that we don't get any local dimming whatsoever except for the most expensive 4K unit, which the SONY rep grinned and said would cost "10's of thousands". Now we still have to worry about banding from Edge Lit TVs. That's what will keep me from buying a 2014. If they didn't figure out a trick to rid of all vertical banding (any banding of course) then it really disappoints me to spend $3K on the only 1080 unit with X-tended Dynamic, or any 4K unit that doesn't have the PRO Version of X-tended Dynamic, and I'm afraid only the wealthy will affor a PRO with FALD :'-(

If true, it doesn't surprise me. Sony are ever-willing to heavily compromise all but their top one or two models. Their 1080p sets have been getting worse, IMO, in recent years and it's a case of no corner goes uncut as they desperately pinch a penny here and there.

On the 1080p sets over here:

FALD: gone
Gorilla glass/opti-contrast panel: gone
Metal foot: gone plastic

Even the 55" X900 has a cheapo plastic back. For the price they charge, really, I would expect more.


For me fluxo the gorilla glass/opticontrast panel made the Sony tv's look beautiful on or off and that's one reason why I love my Sony HX850, it has looks and styling. It also has metal backing which I have noticed on the new Sony sets from last year to this years new sets they dont have that. Not a big deal to some because really who looks at the back of the tv anyway? For me though it show's good build quality and has the feel of a high end set. The only thing my HX850 lacked is the full array backlighting which aint no biggie to me because even though its a 2012 set the PQ is phenominal along with solid deep blacks. That all being said. Sony in my book has taken a step back in 2013 and 2014 by cutting back on things that made their sets great in my book like FALD being just one of them. I am a Sony loyalist and have been for many many years but I dont like the direction they are going and after what I have seen so far in 2014 I dont see much of a change. This is all just my opinion mind you.
post #163 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post

If true, it doesn't surprise me. Sony are ever-willing to heavily compromise all but their top one or two models. Their 1080p sets have been getting worse, IMO, in recent years and it's a case of no corner goes uncut as they desperately pinch a penny here and there.

On the 1080p sets over here:

FALD: gone
Gorilla glass/opti-contrast panel: gone
Metal foot: gone plastic

Even the 55" X900 has a cheapo plastic back. For the price they charge, really, I would expect more.

Granted it is the 4K and the Flagship TV (and we or course don't know the price yet) but the XBR-65X950B seems to have a number of items you quote and then some.

FALD
Opti-contrast Panel
Metal/Adjustable stand (with cords threaded through the feet which I hadn't seen in the early CES coverage)
Triluminos Display
Better Motion Flow
Brighter colors and Darker blacks.

I would prefer Passive or Glasses-Free 3D but I am not going to disqualify a TV based on 3D Tech (as long as it does support 3D).
post #164 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by tezster View Post

I personally don't have a problem with a bulky bottom, from an aesthetics standpoint, but functionally, it interferes with the amount of downward tilt possible when wall-mounted.

I am struggling to understand this complaint.

I just installed a mount with a downtilt and I don't see how the amount of downtilt would be affected by the TV being fatter on the bottom. In fact, the bottom of the TV I installed is fatter than that the top (although it's not a "wedge" design).
post #165 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by LookN2Find View Post

I'm personally more aggravated that we don't get any local dimming whatsoever except for the most expensive 4K unit, which the SONY rep grinned and said would cost "10's of thousands". Now we still have to worry about banding from Edge Lit TVs. That's what will keep me from buying a 2014. If they didn't figure out a trick to rid of all vertical banding (any banding of course) then it really disappoints me to spend $3K on the only 1080 unit with X-tended Dynamic, or any 4K unit that doesn't have the PRO Version of X-tended Dynamic, and I'm afraid only the wealthy will affor a PRO with FALD :'-(

If true, it doesn't surprise me. Sony are ever-willing to heavily compromise all but their top one or two models. Their 1080p sets have been getting worse, IMO, in recent years and it's a case of no corner goes uncut as they desperately pinch a penny here and there.

On the 1080p sets over here:

FALD: gone
Gorilla glass/opti-contrast panel: gone
Metal foot: gone plastic

Even the 55" X900 has a cheapo plastic back. For the price they charge, really, I would expect more.


For me fluxo the gorilla glass/opticontrast panel made the Sony tv's look beautiful on or off and that's one reason why I love my Sony HX850, it has looks and styling. It also has metal backing which I have noticed on the new Sony sets from last year to this years new sets they dont have that. Not a big deal to some because really who looks at the back of the tv anyway? For me though it show's good build quality and has the feel of a high end set. The only thing my HX850 lacked is the full array backlighting which aint no biggie to me because even though its a 2012 set the PQ is phenominal along with solid deep blacks. That all being said. Sony in my book has taken a step back in 2013 and 2014 by cutting back on things that made their sets great in my book like FALD being just one of them. I am a Sony loyalist and have been for many many years but I dont like the direction they are going and after what I have seen so far in 2014 I dont see much of a change. This is all just my opinion mind you.

The HX850 is, as you indicate, an attractive TV. The gorilla glass is both a beautiful and a practical design feature.
post #166 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaguarCRO View Post

Granted it is the 4K and the Flagship TV (and we or course don't know the price yet) but the XBR-65X950B seems to have a number of items you quote and then some.

FALD
Opti-contrast Panel
Metal/Adjustable stand (with cords threaded through the feet which I hadn't seen in the early CES coverage)
Triluminos Display
Better Motion Flow
Brighter colors and Darker blacks.

I would prefer Passive or Glasses-Free 3D but I am not going to disqualify a TV based on 3D Tech (as long as it does support 3D).

That sounds nice, but it is absolutely impossible to physically accommodate such a large TV in my small European apartment. To get a Sony TV that will fit in my room now involves such a dramatic loss of quality that I'd rather not bother or look elsewhere. As I indicated - apart from one or two lines they're simply not in the quality game anymore.

When thinking about the use of low quality plastic on the back of the X900, I recalled this Steve Jobs quote I had read online:

“I want it to be as beautiful as possible, even if it’s inside the box. A great carpenter isn’t going to use lousy wood for the back of a cabinet, even though nobody’s going to see it. When you’re a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you’re not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You’ll know it’s there, so you’re going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through.”

You can dismiss aesthetics, but, unlike Sony, Apple under Jobs knew how to actually make money in established and highly competitive markets (e.g., the home computer market).
post #167 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post

That sounds nice, but it is absolutely impossible to physically accommodate such a large TV in my small European apartment. To get a Sony TV that will fit in my room now involves such a dramatic loss of quality that I'd rather not bother or look elsewhere. As I indicated - apart from one or two lines they're simply not in the quality game anymore.

When thinking about the use of low quality plastic on the back of the X900, I recalled this Steve Jobs quote I had read online:

“I want it to be as beautiful as possible, even if it’s inside the box. A great carpenter isn’t going to use lousy wood for the back of a cabinet, even though nobody’s going to see it. When you’re a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you’re not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You’ll know it’s there, so you’re going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through.”

You can dismiss aesthetics, but, unlike Sony, Apple under Jobs knew how to actually make money in established and highly competitive markets (e.g., the home computer market).

I remember when Steve Jobs compared the iphone to the Leica camera. That told me everything I needed to know about it being a precision device.
post #168 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by JaguarCRO View Post

Granted it is the 4K and the Flagship TV (and we or course don't know the price yet) but the XBR-65X950B seems to have a number of items you quote and then some.

FALD
Opti-contrast Panel
Metal/Adjustable stand (with cords threaded through the feet which I hadn't seen in the early CES coverage)
Triluminos Display
Better Motion Flow
Brighter colors and Darker blacks.

I would prefer Passive or Glasses-Free 3D but I am not going to disqualify a TV based on 3D Tech (as long as it does support 3D).

That sounds nice, but it is absolutely impossible to physically accommodate such a large TV in my small European apartment. To get a Sony TV that will fit in my room now involves such a dramatic loss of quality that I'd rather not bother or look elsewhere. As I indicated - apart from one or two lines they're simply not in the quality game anymore.

When thinking about the use of low quality plastic on the back of the X900, I recalled this Steve Jobs quote I had read online:

“I want it to be as beautiful as possible, even if it’s inside the box. A great carpenter isn’t going to use lousy wood for the back of a cabinet, even though nobody’s going to see it. When you’re a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you’re not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You’ll know it’s there, so you’re going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through.”

You can dismiss aesthetics, but, unlike Sony, Apple under Jobs knew how to actually make money in established and highly competitive markets (e.g., the home computer market).


Maybe Sony should look at that comment from Steve Job's and learn something from it because from what I have seen from them in 2013 and 2014 they have lost their way. To be honest they started losing their way long before that. The best tv's that I have seen come from Sony have been the XBR 8, the XBR 929/950 and the HX850. No other tv's I have seen from them have impressed me at all like the one's I just mentioned. No wonder that Vizio and Samsung have surpassed them in sales and their tv production is hurting. Cutting corners and sub par quality products will do that. mad.gif
post #169 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I am struggling to understand this complaint.

I just installed a mount with a downtilt and I don't see how the amount of downtilt would be affected by the TV being fatter on the bottom. In fact, the bottom of the TV I installed is fatter than that the top (although it's not a "wedge" design).

If the back of a 'wedge' panel is parallel to the wall, then the front of the panel will be tilted up. If the front of the panel is tilted up 5* and the tilt mount has a range of 15*, then the maximum downward tilt will be 10* (15-5).
post #170 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnbowm View Post

If the back of a 'wedge' panel is parallel to the wall, then the front of the panel will be tilted up. If the front of the panel is tilted up 5* and the tilt mount has a range of 15*, then the maximum downward tilt will be 10* (15-5).

You would not mount the flat part parallel to the wall. That makes no sense at all.

Also, on my articulating mount, if you were being anal retentive, you could shove the TV flat against the wall if it was wedged, I suppose. You'd lose not one degree of downtilt doing this. It would be stupid and unusable in this position however.

Sorry, but the wedge is really a non-issue other than the part where it will look less attractive from the side (where TVs never looked attractive anyway). And to lose the soundbar, well, that's likely worth it for most people.
post #171 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by turnbowm View Post

If the back of a 'wedge' panel is parallel to the wall, then the front of the panel will be tilted up. If the front of the panel is tilted up 5* and the tilt mount has a range of 15*, then the maximum downward tilt will be 10* (15-5).

You would not mount the flat part parallel to the wall. That makes no sense at all.
.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. A standard mount (or a tilt mount in the upright position) is parallel to the wall and when the back of the TV is attached to the mount, it also becomes parallel to the wall.
post #172 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by dargo View Post

"streaming 4K would require a bandwidth to the home of less than 15 Mbps" More pie in the sky from Netflix, 95% of us really only get a sustained speeds of less than 5Mbps ...
I don't know about the 95% figure, but a sustained speed of 5Mbps is about right for me, too (in Honolulu).
post #173 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnbowm View Post

Perhaps I wasn't clear. A standard mount (or a tilt mount in the upright position) is parallel to the wall and when the back of the TV is attached to the mount, it also becomes parallel to the wall.

You are confused about the design of the Sony. With a standard mount, the TV will sit perfectly vertical. It will not tilt upwards. It will be parallel to the wall.

The only thing unusual that will occur is that with a non-wedge TV, the gap from the bottom of the TV and the top of the TV to the wall tends to be somewhat similar (although to be honest, not as similar as people think... I have two flat panels in my home and both are clearly much thicker on the bottom...) On the wedge design, you will see the bottom sitting much closer to the wall than the top...

None of the other things you think are going to happen are going to happen. The mounting configuration is not sloped.
post #174 of 577
Does any one know dimensions of the 65 inch flagship 4K
post #175 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoro View Post

Does any one know dimensions of the 65 inch flagship 4K

Sony's product specification page doesn't say ...

http://store.sony.com/gsi/webstore/WFS/SNYNA-SNYUS-Site/en_US/-/USD/ViewProduct-Start?SKU=27-XBR65X950B

but if we assume it is close to one of Sony's last years 65" model(KDL-65W850A) it would be about:

Dimensions (Approx.) : TV only: 57 7/8 x 34 x 2 5/8(1 3/16) in (1468x863x64.29 mm) TV with stand: 57 7/8 x 35 1/4 x 16 in (1468x894x405 mm)
post #176 of 577
So the 65" -- 950B unit's are supposed to hit in May. 84" -- 950B will hit in July.

XBR900B 79", 65", 55" May

XBR850B 70", 65", 55", 49" July and August
post #177 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma View Post

So the 65" -- 950B unit's are supposed to hit in May. 84" -- 950B will hit in July.

XBR900B 79", 65", 55" May

XBR850B 70", 65", 55", 49" July and August

Any word on the 850b price?
post #178 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma View Post

So the 65" -- 950B unit's are supposed to hit in May. 84" -- 950B will hit in July.

XBR900B 79", 65", 55" May

XBR850B 70", 65", 55", 49" July and August

Well that kind of sucks as that means the all these TVs will likely miss the VE Shootout 2014.

At least with the 65" 950B availability in May I only have about 4 more months until my new 4k TV is available. biggrin.gif Any pricing info to share?
post #179 of 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma View Post

So the 65" -- 950B unit's are supposed to hit in May. 84" -- 950B will hit in July.

XBR900B 79", 65", 55" May

XBR850B 70", 65", 55", 49" July and August

How did you find that out if you don't mind me asking
post #180 of 577
The only problem with Sony displays is they don't offer complete calibration controls (CMS, etc.).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Sony UHDTVs at CES 2014