Samsung 88" Q9F QLED HDR UHDTV Launches - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 95Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 12:21 AM
Member
 
Blitzdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 93
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keithian View Post
I saw that in the store, had them change the feed to DirectTV/CNN/ESPN and I was very far from impressed with the quality of the upscaling when I had the 940E, Z9, A1E sitting right next to it. There is a reason it is so cheap...though I guess there are those out there who will love the picture. I was a bit dissapointed in that same store that the Q9 wasn't there to play with. They said they sold it. That's my next mission, wait for the a store to get an 88" so I can see its upscaling in person next to those same TVs. I saw the upscaling of a smaller sized Q9 in a different store and though I thought it looked great, but it was so far from the other TVs, it was impossible to compare them properly and unlike the other store, they wouldn't move their TVs for me :-) The color and brightness were amazing though and the content looked quite sharp.
AVSForum likes value for money and I hear you. This community sold out the LeEco UMax85 with no promise of brand integrity or updates or support or warranty. Not saying just saying. A $4,500 82" MU is no small revelation to all but the nth degree discerning.
sk373 likes this.

AVS Forum Marketing Solutions
m. 416-578-0769
e. [email protected]
Blitzdog is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 02:38 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 5
I can't wait for a first review of the Q9 at this size! I'm hoping we see some comparisons against Samsung's JS and KS models at the same size to see if they are moving forward despite the edge lit tech they are employing. As someone with no particular preference on brand but certainly on size, I can accept that the performance is not likely to be up there with the OLEDs or even Z9, but if it improves from JS / KS levels which were generally well received then I would be happy. I think few would deny that the improvements may be being achieved at a greater rate with OLED and Sony LCD but until they offer this size one can only compare against the next best which in this case is JS / KS. Needless to say I'm keeping an eye out on imagic :-). PS. Something I think is often overlooked is that fibre connection that Samsung have managed to incorporate - really feel LG missed a trick here with their W7...
s.mirren is offline  
post #33 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 04:41 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Big Al you got the 88 incher on order?
styx rogan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 05:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
skschatzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 3,732
Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2823 Post(s)
Liked: 1628
@fierce_gt smart man. The sad thing is there will be people that buy it. "Status" for having the biggest, most expensive Samsung TV. I live in Omaha and work in expensive Mansion style homes out here. Nearly all of them have giant Samsung TVs. I expect I'll see a few of these. Cost and Size > Practicality and Quality. Only in America.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
sickkent likes this.

Last edited by skschatzman; 08-05-2017 at 05:11 AM.
skschatzman is offline  
post #35 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 06:57 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 16,076
Mentioned: 441 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9160 Post(s)
Liked: 16156
Quote:
Originally Posted by skschatzman View Post
@fierce_gt smart man. The sad thing is there will be people that buy it. "Status" for having the biggest, most expensive Samsung TV. I live in Omaha and work in expensive Mansion style homes out here. Nearly all of them have giant Samsung TVs. I expect I'll see a few of these. Cost and Size > Practicality and Quality. Only in America.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Or, that here in the US people have larger rooms where bigger TVs make sense, and the cost of an 88" OLED is too much (I hear it's still in the millions).
hermosa and Keithian like this.

Mark Henninger
Editor, AVS Forum
imagic is offline  
post #36 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 08:10 AM
 
audacious nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 844
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 465 Post(s)
Liked: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by skschatzman View Post
@fierce_gt smart man. The sad thing is there will be people that buy it. "Status" for having the biggest, most expensive Samsung TV. I live in Omaha and work in expensive Mansion style homes out here. Nearly all of them have giant Samsung TVs. I expect I'll see a few of these. Cost and Size > Practicality and Quality. Only in America.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
It's a TV, why are you discussing practicality? Are you regularly transporting your TV back and forth? Last time I checked, practicality is not on the list of requirements for people buying a 65"+ TV. The most unpractical thing is transporting it and mounting it, but the seller will transport it and you can pay them to mount it if you don't want to do that yourself. Which is actually something you could do for any size TV.

Also, what's wrong with wealthy people buying expensive things, other than the fact that you can't have them? Just because they want a large TV does not mean it's solely for status. That's like saying that anyone that buys a slightly larger TV instead of buying the absolute best TV at a smaller size is doing it for "status." I bought the biggest TV that fit my budget, and they have a much larger budget that allows for a much bigger TV. It's asinine conjecture.
hermosa, Dave-T, sk373 and 1 others like this.
audacious nick is offline  
post #37 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 08:30 AM
boe
AVS Forum Special Member
 
boe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 4,295
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1215 Post(s)
Liked: 550
While I don't like the motion and other artifacts I've experienced when tweaking Samsung TVs, I applaud any movement forward from the puny 65" standard. Hopefully the 77" OLED will come down in price once they start offering decent sized OLEDs.
boe is offline  
post #38 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 09:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 977 Post(s)
Liked: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by skschatzman View Post
@fierce_gt smart man. The sad thing is there will be people that buy it. "Status" for having the biggest, most expensive Samsung TV. I live in Omaha and work in expensive Mansion style homes out here. Nearly all of them have giant Samsung TVs. I expect I'll see a few of these. Cost and Size > Practicality and Quality. Only in America.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
What is wrong with getting a TV of this size if your room is big enough to accommodate it? Why should you settle for a smaller less satisfying size that makes you wish for that same large room that you had a size that feels a bit closer to a movie theater? It may have nothing to do with 'status'. If there was a Z9 88", in a similar price range, or an 88" OLED, perhaps this conversation would be different, but there isn't. In the case of this thread, we have an excellent TV, not the best perhaps when size is removed from the equation, that is still a pretty damn good TV when compared to most TVs out there sitting in everyone's homes that again, might be more appropriate for their room size or the desire to have a more immersive experience due to the size without having to buy a projector which might not look suitable in their room.

Finally, you make it sound like this is some sort of crap TV. Though they didn't do fantastic in the shootout whose purpose is not to emulate everyday viewing conditions in the everyday home, there are quite a number of reviews out there that give this TV much higher marks then some of you are making it sound. All you have to do is google it to see. A rating of 8/10 from rtings.com means it is still an excellent TV. A rating of 4.5 from Techhive is still an excellent TV. A rating of 7.9 from Consumer Reports with a 'recommended' designation is still an excellent TV. A rating of 4.5 from Techradar is still an excellent TV. A rating of 9/10 from Trusted Reviews is still an excellent TV. I can keep going. The reality is that MOST reviewers or professional outlets will state that OLED versus LCD very much depends on your priorities and watching conditions. And for many, whether they are rich or not, this is the appropriate TV at 88" for their size room or watching conditions.

Is it overpriced, absolutely, which is why most should wait for the price to drop a bit unless money is no object for them.
Keithian is offline  
post #39 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 10:04 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 16,076
Mentioned: 441 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9160 Post(s)
Liked: 16156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keithian View Post
What is wrong with getting a TV of this size if your room is big enough to accommodate it? Why should you settle for a smaller less satisfying size that makes you wish for that same large room that you had a size that feels a bit closer to a movie theater? It may have nothing to do with 'status'. If there was a Z9 88", in a similar price range, or an 88" OLED, perhaps this conversation would be different, but there isn't. In the case of this thread, we have an excellent TV, not the best perhaps when size is removed from the equation, that is still a pretty damn good TV when compared to most TVs out there sitting in everyone's homes that again, might be more appropriate for their room size or the desire to have a more immersive experience due to the size without having to buy a projector which might not look suitable in their room.

Finally, you make it sound like this is some sort of crap TV. Though they didn't do fantastic in the shootout whose purpose is not to emulate everyday viewing conditions in the everyday home, there are quite a number of reviews out there that give this TV much higher marks then some of you are making it sound. All you have to do is google it to see. A rating of 8/10 from rtings.com means it is still an excellent TV. A rating of 4.5 from Techhive is still an excellent TV. A rating of 7.9 from Consumer Reports with a 'recommended' designation is still an excellent TV. A rating of 4.5 from Techradar is still an excellent TV. A rating of 9/10 from Trusted Reviews is still an excellent TV. I can keep going. The reality is that MOST reviewers or professional outlets will state that OLED versus LCD very much depends on your priorities and watching conditions. And for many, whether they are rich or not, this is the appropriate TV at 88" for their size room or watching conditions.

Is it overpriced, absolutely, which is why most should wait for the price to drop a bit unless money is no object for them.
Yay, fantastic post, perfect summary.
hermosa and Keithian like this.

Mark Henninger
Editor, AVS Forum
imagic is offline  
post #40 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 01:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
Posts: 6,516
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2293 Post(s)
Liked: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave-T View Post
i was at Best Buy yesterday and they were setting up the UM82MU8000 in a corner in the opposite direction of all of the Sony and LG OLEDS, what does that tell you? By the way I was not that impressed.
It should tell you nothing
The TV manufacturers pay marketing funds for the spots they have at Best Buy

As for the MU8000 its really not that impressive...last years KS8000 was a better set
Street price on the MU8000 is already below where the KS8000 was this time last year

Warren

Rm 1 LG65E7 Marantz 8802A prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A and HK PA2400 amps B&W CM10s..CM2 center...CM6's.rears
Rm 2 Sony 49x900E Denon X7200 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Sony 55x930E Yamaha A1060 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Sony 65Z9D
turnne1 is offline  
post #41 of 80 Old 08-05-2017, 01:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
Posts: 6,516
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2293 Post(s)
Liked: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by FullyArray View Post
Going back to edge lit for their flagship does no good when reviews keep comparing its big weakness against the top OLEDs and Z9D. The market has decided they greatly value deep blacks for premium tvs.

Something tells me Samsung will copy Sony's lineup next year, minus the oled.
OR

Come out with their own OLED since that seems to be hot panel to have now
Sony must have seen the trajectory of LG OLED growth( and profitability) and decided it only made the best business sense to get on the wagon

Warren

Rm 1 LG65E7 Marantz 8802A prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A and HK PA2400 amps B&W CM10s..CM2 center...CM6's.rears
Rm 2 Sony 49x900E Denon X7200 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Sony 55x930E Yamaha A1060 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Sony 65Z9D
turnne1 is offline  
post #42 of 80 Old 08-06-2017, 01:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SnellTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,078
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 484
$20,000 and you get clouding, no proper FALD, low contrast and poor blacks. No thanks Samsung.
robdman and sickkent like this.
SnellTHX is offline  
post #43 of 80 Old 08-07-2017, 12:24 PM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 21,155
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1800 Post(s)
Liked: 3579
posts deleted

please limit posts to technical issues
Keithian likes this.

please take the high road in every post:do not respond to or quote a problematic post: report it
HDMI.org:what a mess HDCP = Hollywood's Draconian Copy Protection system
LG C9 OLED owner


markrubin is offline  
post #44 of 80 Old 08-07-2017, 05:45 PM
Member
 
dizzyscure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I seen the 82" in BB today not a bad TV at all, But im going projector route also. But if i was closer that 13' viewing distance i would be seriously considering the 82" Sammy
dizzyscure is offline  
post #45 of 80 Old 08-08-2017, 03:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,995
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by audacious nick View Post
It's a TV, why are you discussing practicality? Are you regularly transporting your TV back and forth? Last time I checked, practicality is not on the list of requirements for people buying a 65"+ TV. The most unpractical thing is transporting it and mounting it, but the seller will transport it and you can pay them to mount it if you don't want to do that yourself. Which is actually something you could do for any size TV.

Also, what's wrong with wealthy people buying expensive things, other than the fact that you can't have them? Just because they want a large TV does not mean it's solely for status. That's like saying that anyone that buys a slightly larger TV instead of buying the absolute best TV at a smaller size is doing it for "status." I bought the biggest TV that fit my budget, and they have a much larger budget that allows for a much bigger TV. It's asinine conjecture.
it's funny, because 'practicality' is exactly what LED manufacturers have been counting on for years. if tv's actually sold based on pq and price alone, we'd probably never had LED's over 40" to begin with...

let's face it, the ease of getting a tv home, hooking it up, hanging it on a wall, and potentially moving it to a different room or house are all factors that will be considered by potential buyers. when you get up over 65" these considerations can become more significant. at 75 and up, you really need to take some measurements to make sure the tv fits through the front door!

there is always going to be that 'weird' segment between reasonably priced big screen tv's and projectors. for anybody that has a projector, the thought of spending 20grand to get a screen 40" smaller is just bizarre. for people who can't make a projector work, getting a 75-77" tv for 15k less makes more sense. i remember a time i was saving up for a 40" (at about 2grand) because i felt that was big enough, and the prices jumped very quickly (like another 500 to go up to 46"), so i'm sure in a few years 88" flat screens for under 4grand will be available, and then it'll make more sense to more people.

as far as 'status' purchases go, that's a can of worms, but i'd basically say any time people buy something based hype and marketing you could call that a status purchase. think of that tv show 'cribs'. they never make comments like 'check out my z9, it had the most dimming zones', it's usually more like 'yo gots to have the 90inch, if you don't got a 90inch then you ain't really watching'. and basically i don't think anybody on this site is going to fit into that 'bought for the status' category

the problem is these are the people with enough disposable income to basically finance the development of new technologies. so if they get suckered into buying 'flashy' displays with weak pq, then the better pq displays might not sell and that tech never gets developed further...

bottom line, imo, size is great, but never at the cost of quality. i try to buy the largest 'good' tv i can afford. it's up to everybody to figure out what 'good' is for them. for me, a display without near perfect uniformity, is not good enough

what's wrong with wealthy people wasting money? a lot actually... but this is clearly not the place to discuss 1%'s and global economy
sickkent likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 08-08-2017 at 03:43 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
post #46 of 80 Old 08-08-2017, 06:55 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Kind of makes my 88JS9500 for $11,000 seem that much better.

Last edited by Dr Chill; 08-08-2017 at 07:20 PM.
Dr Chill is offline  
post #47 of 80 Old 08-09-2017, 04:38 AM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 16,076
Mentioned: 441 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9160 Post(s)
Liked: 16156
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
it's funny, because 'practicality' is exactly what LED manufacturers have been counting on for years. if tv's actually sold based on pq and price alone, we'd probably never had LED's over 40" to begin with...

let's face it, the ease of getting a tv home, hooking it up, hanging it on a wall, and potentially moving it to a different room or house are all factors that will be considered by potential buyers. when you get up over 65" these considerations can become more significant. at 75 and up, you really need to take some measurements to make sure the tv fits through the front door!
Some of the great mysteries that may never be answered. How do people get beds inside their home? How do people get refrigerators inside their home? And perhaps the greatest mystery of all, how do people get a sofa inside their home?

Here's my take. I've handled every 65 inch TV I've reviewed myself. A 75-incher would prompt me to ask a friend or neighbor for help due to the weight. But since the door on my fridge measures 76" diagonal, and that fridge is considerably bulkier than a TV, and I live in small Philly row house, I think maybe you have to get to 85" before breaking out the tape measure, and then only if you live in an apartment at the top of a winding staircase.

Then again, my skills when it comes to assembling and moving TVs may be the result of practice. I could probably juggle 55" TVs, that's how comfortable I am handling them.

Mark Henninger
Editor, AVS Forum
imagic is offline  
post #48 of 80 Old 08-09-2017, 09:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,995
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Some of the great mysteries that may never be answered. How do people get beds inside their home? How do people get refrigerators inside their home? And perhaps the greatest mystery of all, how do people get a sofa inside their home?

Here's my take. I've handled every 65 inch TV I've reviewed myself. A 75-incher would prompt me to ask a friend or neighbor for help due to the weight. But since the door on my fridge measures 76" diagonal, and that fridge is considerably bulkier than a TV, and I live in small Philly row house, I think maybe you have to get to 85" before breaking out the tape measure, and then only if you live in an apartment at the top of a winding staircase.

Then again, my skills when it comes to assembling and moving TVs may be the result of practice. I could probably juggle 55" TVs, that's how comfortable I am handling them.
my bed was assembled in my room, and i had to disassemble and reassemble it when i moved(it's queen size)

my refrigerator(which is about 75" diagonally) had to be unboxed and very carefully carried in by two delivery guys, after the door was removed from the hinges. it also didn't have to go downstairs or around any corners

same deal with the sofa, would not fit in the box(my loveseat actually came in three pieces). the PROFESSIONAL delivery guys actually damaged my home while bringing in the couch. it wasn't necessary for them to cause that damage to get it inside, but clearly it's more of a risk, the larger and heavier the item is. also, my couch is smaller in most dimensions than a 75" tv would be. not to mention a heck of a lot less delicate.

-all of the above are significant moving jobs, often requiring help, and/or removal of some obstacles in the way. my point is not that it's impossible to move a >75" tv, my point is that it's not easy. most tv's i've owned have found their way into at least 3 different rooms, as i tend to pass them along from 'theater' to living room, to bedroom as i upgrade. that includes the 46" RPTV we had

my comment is based on the immense difficulty that i had getting my 64" f8500 into my previous basement. it absolutely was not making it down the stairs and around the corner in the box, and even when taken out, i had to angle it a bit to get around the corner. i suspect a 75" or larger would need to be completely on its side to make that journey. and would not be a one-person job.

i'm sure it's possible to get larger tv's into tight spaces, but it's a more significant endeavour and i'm sure at some point, somebody is going to be stuck taking doors off their hinges, needing help or something to get it through. i'm not claiming these have reached a point where it's impossible, but it's certainly 'an event' you don't want to do often and i don't think that should be understated. as manufacturers continue to increase size, i fully expect this to be an issue that needs to be addressed pretty soon. whether they start shipping them with assembly required, offer tiled screens, or we see flexible designs to help.
sickkent likes this.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #49 of 80 Old 08-09-2017, 09:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
green666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Croatia
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 339 Post(s)
Liked: 126
If they include free calibration with it I ll do it
Keithian likes this.

1st 55js8002: Bad DSE - returned for replace
2nd 55js8002: Exactly the same thing - refund
55js9002: Panel R.I.P. (edge bleed after 1 year of use) - refund
55x900E: Great TV - hope it will last
green666 is offline  
post #50 of 80 Old 08-09-2017, 03:56 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Some of the great mysteries that may never be answered. How do people get beds inside their home? How do people get refrigerators inside their home? And perhaps the greatest mystery of all, how do people get a sofa inside their home?

Here's my take. I've handled every 65 inch TV I've reviewed myself. A 75-incher would prompt me to ask a friend or neighbor for help due to the weight. But since the door on my fridge measures 76" diagonal, and that fridge is considerably bulkier than a TV, and I live in small Philly row house, I think maybe you have to get to 85" before breaking out the tape measure, and then only if you live in an apartment at the top of a winding staircase.

Then again, my skills when it comes to assembling and moving TVs may be the result of practice. I could probably juggle 55" TVs, that's how comfortable I am handling them.
Moving and especially hanging an 88" TV takes a minimum of 3 people. It's no small job and there's a lot to lose if someone slips up. Better left to insured professionals.
Dr Chill is offline  
post #51 of 80 Old 08-09-2017, 04:14 PM - Thread Starter
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 16,076
Mentioned: 441 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9160 Post(s)
Liked: 16156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Chill View Post
Moving and especially hanging an 88" TV takes a minimum of 3 people. It's no small job and there's a lot to lose if someone slips up. Better left to insured professionals.
Yes an 88-incher, due to size and weight and cost, for sure. And I'm sure they measure first!

Mark Henninger
Editor, AVS Forum
imagic is offline  
post #52 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 10:51 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 16,817
Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12671 Post(s)
Liked: 11901
Not sure if this is the right place to post. But a new story by flatpanelsHD reports that Samsung is cutting back production by 10-15%, which is a lot. The premium market has surely swung in other manufacturers favor enough to effect production. Overpriced edge lit when there are better options out there. Samsung needs a good bouncback year next year to compete in the premium market. It's bad enough they won't embrace Dolby Vision, but sacrificing picture quality should be a big no no.
sickkent and FullyArray like this.
ray0414 is online now  
post #53 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 12:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 977 Post(s)
Liked: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
Not sure if this is the right place to post. But a new story by flatpanelsHD reports that Samsung is cutting back production by 10-15%, which is a lot. The premium market has surely swung in other manufacturers favor enough to effect production. Overpriced edge lit when there are better options out there. Samsung needs a good bouncback year next year to compete in the premium market. It's bad enough they won't embrace Dolby Vision, but sacrificing picture quality should be a big no no.
There aren't many options at 88" and even the word 'better' is subjective and depends on priorities, what you watch, concerns (Burn In, etc) and viewing conditions. I think we can all agree though that the TV is overpriced, so hopefully the cutting back in production if true will lower the 20K TV that this thread is about to half that one day :-).

Last edited by Keithian; 08-10-2017 at 12:52 PM.
Keithian is offline  
post #54 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 12:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,045
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Liked: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitzdog View Post
I kinda feel like an 82" MU for $4,500 is the WOW buried in this article.
Right? That's $2,583 per inch savings.

My first projection setup was on an 80" screen. My room size limits me to 120", but my projector is 1080p. Drop 32", gain 4X pixels, HDR, brighter picture, wider color gamut... it's actually tempting.
nathanddrews is offline  
post #55 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 02:43 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 16,817
Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12671 Post(s)
Liked: 11901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keithian View Post
There aren't many options at 88" and even the word 'better' is subjective and depends on priorities, what you watch, concerns (Burn In, etc) and viewing conditions. I think we can all agree though that the TV is overpriced, so hopefully the cutting back in production if true will lower the 20K TV that this thread is about to half that one day :-).


The back lighting system being worse than other brands isn't subjective, it's fact. Superior backlight systems: LG OLED, sony oled, 940e, Z9D, Panasonic oled, Vizio P series, ks9800, maybe even the sony edge lit 930e as well, maybe even the 900e too.

I understand there aren't many 88" options, but at this point I'd try to snag an 88" ks9800 for half the price online somewhere.
ray0414 is online now  
post #56 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 04:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 977 Post(s)
Liked: 709
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
The back lighting system being worse than other brands isn't subjective, it's fact. Superior backlight systems: LG OLED, sony oled, 940e, Z9D, Panasonic oled, Vizio P series, ks9800, maybe even the sony edge lit 930e as well, maybe even the 900e too.

I understand there aren't many 88" options, but at this point I'd try to snag an 88" ks9800 for half the price online somewhere.
Just because a TV is edge lit doesn't default it to 'worse'. There are plenty of articles out there that point out that using buzzwords like FALD or backlight systems doesn't mean the TV is better. There are many reviews out there that give the Q9 very high marks (Consumer Reports deemed it 'recommended' unlike the Z9 which is didn't) for the strengths is does have, and ignoring conditions and just buying a TV based on what you call facts disregarding priorities of what someone looks for in a TV, viewing conditions (windows, lights on, content you watch, etc) concerns (Burn In), what their own eyes perceive, distance, etc would be unwise advise to give anyone. The better advice would be for someone to go see something with their own eyes in multiple lighting conditions, define their use case, the size they are looking for, what they are looking to pay, read up about pros and cons, and make their own decision. I've done a ton of research of the last couple of months on these TVs and though I preferred the picture of the A1E and LG, they aren't offered at 88" and I personally didn't feel that the upscaled capabilities knowing the bright and windowed room I am in of the other TVs you listed were as good as what I saw with the Q9. The picture of the Q9 was more pleasing to my eye when watching DirectTV. That is my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
TKS64 and King Richard like this.

Last edited by Keithian; 08-10-2017 at 04:20 PM.
Keithian is offline  
post #57 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 06:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 16,817
Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12671 Post(s)
Liked: 11901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keithian View Post
Just because a TV is edge lit doesn't default it to 'worse'. There are plenty of articles out there that point out that using buzzwords like FALD or backlight systems doesn't mean the TV is better. There are many reviews out there that give the Q9 very high marks (Consumer Reports deemed it 'recommended' unlike the Z9 which is didn't) for the strengths is does have, and ignoring conditions and just buying a TV based on what you call facts disregarding priorities of what someone looks for in a TV, viewing conditions (windows, lights on, content you watch, etc) concerns (Burn In), what their own eyes perceive, distance, etc would be unwise advise to give anyone. The better advice would be for someone to go see something with their own eyes in multiple lighting conditions, define their use case, the size they are looking for, what they are looking to pay, read up about pros and cons, and make their own decision. I've done a ton of research of the last couple of months on these TVs and though I preferred the picture of the A1E and LG, they aren't offered at 88" and I personally didn't feel that the upscaled capabilities knowing the bright and windowed room I am in of the other TVs you listed were as good as what I saw with the Q9. The picture of the Q9 was more pleasing to my eye when watching DirectTV. That is my opinion and I'm entitled to it.


Sorry, but every expert or reviewer that has had the Q9 next to ANY of the TVs i listed above have all agreed the Q9 has the inferior backlight design. Every. Single. Expert.

Perhaps you missed the 2017 value electronics shootout? The Q9 was flat out embarrassed off the stage when it came to dark room performance.

Does the Q9 have its own strengths? Of. Course it does. It has the best anti glare panel on the market and beautiful vibrant colors. Bright room Performance is excellent on the Q9 also, super impressive.


Don't be fooled by the Q9. I believe it is a placeholder TV until Samsung releases Qled next year with Quantum Dot Color Filters on the front of the panel. This is supposed to drastically improve viewing angles and also lower light bleed as certain Blu lights won't be needed anymore to light the picture. MAYBE I'll upgrade my ks9800 with one of those bad boys.
sickkent and King Richard like this.

Last edited by ray0414; 08-10-2017 at 06:51 PM.
ray0414 is online now  
post #58 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 08:34 PM
Member
 
Blitzdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Toronto
Posts: 93
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnellTHX View Post
$20,000 and you get clouding, no proper FALD, low contrast and poor blacks. No thanks Samsung.
Proof?

AVS Forum Marketing Solutions
m. 416-578-0769
e. [email protected]
Blitzdog is offline  
post #59 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 09:30 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 16,817
Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12671 Post(s)
Liked: 11901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitzdog View Post
Proof?
http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/qled-q9f-q9


Rtings rated the dimming performance a 2.0 out of 10. a 2.0 lol

Also. you can find any review online from professionals that have had negative things to say about the backlighting on the Q9. From flatpanelHD, Forbes, HDGuru. Granted those reviews were for the 65", but there is no indication whatsoever that the 88" version will have an advanced backlight system over the smaller version.


I'm not really trying to bash the tv. But as a previus owner of edge lit Samsung tvs (F7100, HU8550, HU9000), and then Samsung FALD tvs (JS9500, KS9800), it blows my mind and is a slap in the face to go back to edge lit tvs and still charge a giant premium.
SnellTHX and sickkent like this.

82Q90R*75Q9FN(RIP)*55C8OLED*Galaxy Note10+*Ub820 fed into Oppo 203*XB1X*4k DenonX4200

MASTER LIST OF HDR CONTENT THREAD HERE, UPDATED OFTEN
ray0414 is online now  
post #60 of 80 Old 08-10-2017, 10:19 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Cam1977's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: El paso
Posts: 5,440
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3051 Post(s)
Liked: 3737
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
Not sure if this is the right place to post. But a new story by flatpanelsHD reports that Samsung is cutting back production by 10-15%, which is a lot. The premium market has surely swung in other manufacturers favor enough to effect production. Overpriced edge lit when there are better options out there. Samsung needs a good bouncback year next year to compete in the premium market. It's bad enough they won't embrace Dolby Vision, but sacrificing picture quality should be a big no no.
They probably wouldn't do so bad if they offered more panels with FALD and of course lowering their prices. Its so bad with them that today at BB after looking for a vizio for my room, the sales clerk recommended me to buy the 8000 rather than the q series...no bueno when they no those sets are way over priced. I never really had anything against sammies but your right on reverting back to edge lit instead of simply embracing FALD.

Last edited by Cam1977; 08-10-2017 at 10:22 PM.
Cam1977 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

Tags
88" q9f , qled , Samsung

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