2019 Samsung Q90R Owners Thread (No Price Talk) - Page 76 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 4699Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2251 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 08:19 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Anyone else find that Natural picture mode with a few adjustments looks the best for Cable/1080? After comparing it to Standard and Movie, it just looks the sharpest to my eye and 1080p footage in dark and light scenes look amazing and near 4k.
QledBeta likes this.
superman11 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2252 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 09:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Sorry to go a little off topic here but have you checked out the q60r review by rtings? They measured 375 nits at it's highest peak. I saw the tv at Best buy and there is no way in hell that tv is 375 nits. Also noticed under non-native contrast ratio is N/A which probably means they tested everything in a non regular mode. I'm afraid their q90r review will use measurements obtained in a similar manner and show brightness, contrast and color volume numbers much lower than what we are viewing on our sets.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
sd13 is online now  
post #2253 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 10:14 AM
Advanced Member
 
Coercion Shaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
Sorry to go a little off topic here but have you checked out the q60r review by rtings? They measured 375 nits at it's highest peak. I saw the tv at Best buy and there is no way in hell that tv is 375 nits. Also noticed under non-native contrast ratio is N/A which probably means they tested everything in a non regular mode. I'm afraid their q90r review will use measurements obtained in a similar manner and show brightness, contrast and color volume numbers much lower than what we are viewing on our sets.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Unlike the Q90R, that television doesn't have local dimming. It has global dimming. So how were they to measure it?

Sony XBR-65X900F // Sony HTZ9F Sound Bar & SAZ9R Speakers // Xbox One X & PS4 Pro
Coercion Shaman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2254 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 10:32 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
VA_DaveB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,507
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1461 Post(s)
Liked: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
Sorry to go a little off topic here but have you checked out the q60r review by rtings? They measured 375 nits at it's highest peak. I saw the tv at Best buy and there is no way in hell that tv is 375 nits. Also noticed under non-native contrast ratio is N/A which probably means they tested everything in a non regular mode. I'm afraid their q90r review will use measurements obtained in a similar manner and show brightness, contrast and color volume numbers much lower than what we are viewing on our sets.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
They measure it in the relatively dim Movie mode, while the store has it in the Dynamic "torch" mode which is quite a bit brighter. They review all Samsung TVs in the Movie mode since it is the most accurate. Plus the QR60 is quite different being it doesn't have any form of local dimming so no bright HDR highlights are possible.

Last edited by VA_DaveB; 04-08-2019 at 10:36 AM.
VA_DaveB is offline  
post #2255 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
jmpage2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,651
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
Sorry to go a little off topic here but have you checked out the q60r review by rtings? They measured 375 nits at it's highest peak. I saw the tv at Best buy and there is no way in hell that tv is 375 nits. Also noticed under non-native contrast ratio is N/A which probably means they tested everything in a non regular mode. I'm afraid their q90r review will use measurements obtained in a similar manner and show brightness, contrast and color volume numbers much lower than what we are viewing on our sets.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtings
We measured the peak brightness after calibration, using the 'Movie' picture mode and 'Warm 2' color temperature. Different picture modes and color temperatures may be brighter.
Was the one in the store you viewed similarly calibrated? Typically stores put them in a mode made to show off how bright they can get.

Not sure how this relates to Q90R unless this is a preemptive strike from you trying to discredit the testing methodology or accuracy of review that rtings will put out for Q90R before it happens.
jmpage2 is online now  
post #2256 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post
Was the one in the store you viewed similarly calibrated? Typically stores put them in a mode made to show off how bright they can get.
I put it in movie mode and with Hdr demos it still looked to my eye brighter than last year's model. I know it's tough to eyeball peak brightness but I'm very surprised that it was rated at 375 nits max. That's an absurdly low number in the range of the cheapest walMart TV's.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
sd13 is online now  
post #2257 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:25 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
I put it in movie mode and with Hdr demos it still looked to my eye brighter than last year's model. I know it's tough to eyeball peak brightness but I'm very surprised that it was rated at 375 nits max. That's an absurdly low number in the range of the cheapest walMart TV's.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
All of these are reasons why judgment of this set needs to be set aside until the more reputable sources review the lineup. To the eye, lots of things look great. Then you measure it, and eventually put the sets side by side - that's when the differences become most apparent.

Lots of people are loving on the Q90R - I get it, it's their new purchase, and it does some things right that the last year's model didn't. However, the 2019 lineup, so far, isn't exactly proving itself to be superior to 2018 in every way as the more in depth reviews come in. It is looking to be just different - maybe in ways that whets some peoples appetites, but others may be better off grabbing a 2018 set while they are still super cheap and available.

After Rtings' reviews of the 60 and 900, the 90 review from either them or Vincent can't come soon enough.
crono311 is offline  
post #2258 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
jmpage2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,651
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post
All of these are reasons why judgment of this set needs to be set aside until the more reputable sources review the lineup. To the eye, lots of things look great. Then you measure it, and eventually put the sets side by side - that's when the differences become most apparent.

Lots of people are loving on the Q90R - I get it, it's their new purchase, and it does some things right that the last year's model didn't. However, the 2019 lineup, so far, isn't exactly proving itself to be superior to 2018 in every way as the more in depth reviews come in. It is looking to be just different - maybe in ways that whets some peoples appetites, but others may be better off grabbing a 2018 set while they are still super cheap and available.

After Rtings' reviews of the 60 and 900, the 90 review from either them or Vincent can't come soon enough.
I was able to view the Q9F and the Q90R side by side at BB on Saturday. The #1 immediately apparent advantage that Q90R has over Q9F is viewing angles. If you stand even just 20 degrees off axis with both TVs (and they were stacked one atop the other making this easy) then the difference is very noticeable.

In the demo material that was playing and whatever settings were being used the black level appeared better.

All in all I imagine that the improvements on the Q90 compared to Q9F will be more substantial than the differences between C8 and C9 for example. LG have already walked back some of their claims around BFI and low latency on the C9 sets so now the primary difference seems to be slightly higher peak whites and HDMI 2.1 compatibility.... although based on LGs double talk so far this year even that could get walked back a bit.
Mikejl and Terminader like this.
jmpage2 is online now  
post #2259 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:37 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post
I was able to view the Q9F and the Q90R side by side at BB on Saturday. The #1 immediately apparent advantage that Q90R has over Q9F is viewing angles. If you stand even just 20 degrees off axis with both TVs (and they were stacked one atop the other making this easy) then the difference is very noticeable.

In the demo material that was playing and whatever settings were being used the black level appeared better.

All in all I imagine that the improvements on the Q90 compared to Q9F will be more substantial than the differences between C8 and C9 for example. LG have already walked back some of their claims around BFI and low latency on the C9 sets so now the primary difference seems to be slightly higher peak whites and HDMI 2.1 compatibility.... although based on LGs double talk so far this year even that could get walked back a bit.
This seems to be a common observation - I am just stunned that the reviews on the other sets are coming in the way they are. The 2019 lineup has quality all over the place.

2018s lineup seemed to have kept the quality vs value to be fairly consistent across the board (I got both the Q6FN and the Q9FN, both felt that they were worth their price range, and the Q9FN was a logical upgrade in quality and features over the Q6FN - and Q8FN, for that matter).
crono311 is offline  
post #2260 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post
All of these are reasons why judgment of this set needs to be set aside until the more reputable sources review the lineup. To the eye, lots of things look great. Then you measure it, and eventually put the sets side by side - that's when the differences become most apparent.



Lots of people are loving on the Q90R - I get it, it's their new purchase, and it does some things right that the last year's model didn't. However, the 2019 lineup, so far, isn't exactly proving itself to be superior to 2018 in every way as the more in depth reviews come in. It is looking to be just different - maybe in ways that whets some peoples appetites, but others may be better off grabbing a 2018 set while they are still super cheap and available.



After Rtings' reviews of the 60 and 900, the 90 review from either them or Vincent can't come soon enough.
Rtings is more reputable than all the other ones that gave it 5 stars because you say so? I don't care if these reviews rate the q90r at 1 nit, 1% color volume and 100:1 contrast ratio. I owned the q9fn and although this set is not perfect, it blows that one away big time. Better shadow detail, game mode that isn't broken, no undersaturation in sdr, no black crush, better upscaling, way way lower amount of dse to name a few reasons why this one is a definite improvement. And I went through 5 of those sets so panel lottery is definitely not the reason I'm saying this.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
sd13 is online now  
post #2261 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Slickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 495 Post(s)
Liked: 447
I can post some settings later for anyone interested. I've settled on using contrast enhancer for everything except HDR movies. Contrast Enhancer low is a must for SDR. I also use contrast enhancer for game mode HDR although for some reason PC and XBOX settings differ so I have to find a happy medium. Contrast Enhancer Low on SDR is different than any other iteration of Contrast Enhancer. It tones down red significantly, tones down green slightly, and actually boosts blue slightly. I was turning down overall color a notch or 2 before to try and get the searing reds under control but with contrast enhancer I no longer have to do that and can have full saturation of all colors.

Last edited by Slickman; 04-08-2019 at 11:57 AM.
Slickman is offline  
post #2262 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 11:59 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
Rtings is more reputable than all the other ones that gave it 5 stars because you say so? I don't care if these reviews rate the q90r at 1 nit, 1% color volume and 100:1 contrast ratio. I owned the q9fn and although this set is not perfect, it blows that one away big time. Better shadow detail, game mode that isn't broken, no undersaturation in sdr, no black crush, better upscaling, way way lower amount of dse to name a few reasons why this one is a definite improvement. And I went through 5 of those sets so panel lottery is definitely not the reason I'm saying this.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
I prefer having measurements on top of anecdotal testimonies, yes. When they don't match up, you look into the numbers and testimonies.

I get it, you had a bad time with the Q9FN. However, your sensitivities and tolerances are going to be different from my own - it is one perspective to take into consideration.

If the testimonies for the Q90R overwhelmingly go against what an Rtings or a Vincent Teoh have found, then you can begin to look into those reviewers and what they did to come to the conclusions they did. I am not taking any one reviewer at their word (although, I will fully admit that I am disregarding many of the initial reviews for the set as anything other than an indication of how good the set COULD be. We don't know the sample unit they got, and we also don't know if there was any quid-pro-quo going on).
crono311 is offline  
post #2263 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post

I prefer having measurements on top of anecdotal testimonies, yes. When they don't match up, you look into the numbers and testimonies.



I get it, you had a bad time with the Q9FN. However, your sensitivities and tolerances are going to be different from my own - it is one perspective to take into consideration.



If the testimonies for the Q90R overwhelmingly go against what an Rtings or a Vincent Teoh have found, then you can begin to look into those reviewers and what they did to come to the conclusions they did. I am not taking any one reviewer at their word (although, I will fully admit that I am disregarding many of the initial reviews for the set as anything other than an indication of how good the set COULD be. We don't know the sample unit they got, and we also don't know if there was any quid-pro-quo going on).
Not saying rtings is not credible but they give their opinions and have their own methods of measuring which are different than what others publish. They rated the z9d on the same level as the 900e I mean come on man lol. You can't go entirely by what they say.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
sd13 is online now  
post #2264 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 24,750
Mentioned: 81 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6770 Post(s)
Liked: 6778
Quote:
Originally Posted by thirdkind View Post
I have a narrow strip at the top and bottom of the panel, maybe a 1/4" tall, where the color temperature is noticeably cooler/bluer than the rest of the screen. Not terribly noticeable in most content, but sticks out pretty readily when the entire screen is a warm white (I first noticed it while watching a wintry scene in Game of Thrones).

Anybody else have this? Just normal LCD stuff or a manufacturing defect worth a panel swap? I've owned a lot of PC LCD displays over the years and this sort of uniformity issue has cropped up more than once on larger panels.

After calibration, everything else about the panel is great, so I'm hesitant to start a vicious cycle of exchanging panels and getting other problems.
Does not sound normal, however if you like your panel you may want to think about swapping it, you could end up with something worse.....
Cleveland Plasma is online now  
post #2265 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:09 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
Not saying rtings is not credible but they give their opinions and have their own methods of measuring which are different than what others publish. They rated the z9d on the same level as the 900e I mean come on man lol. You can't go entirely by what they say.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


Oh, Rtings' scoring absolutely needs to be overhauled - but I don't go off of their scores, I go off of their measurements (The Z9D was measured to be a better and brighter picture than the 900e, orders magnitude better in terms of brightness.).

Too many top of the line TVs are given the same, or near the same mixed use score. They need to normalize that by taking a look at the distribution. There HAS to be some kind of TV that you can go wrong with buying.
crono311 is offline  
post #2266 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post



Oh, Rtings' scoring absolutely needs to be overhauled - but I don't go off of their scores, I go off of their measurements (The Z9D was measured to be a better and brighter picture than the 900e, orders magnitude better in terms of brightness.).



Too many top of the line TVs are given the same, or near the same mixed use score. They need to normalize that by taking a look at the distribution, and normalizing it a bit. There HAS to be some kind of TV that you can go wrong with buying.
So going by rtings score, you believe the z9f and the q900rb have worse contrast than the ju6500?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
sd13 is online now  
post #2267 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:11 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 16,927
Mentioned: 266 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12750 Post(s)
Liked: 12064
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post

Oh, Rtings' scoring absolutely needs to be overhauled - but I don't go off of their scores, I go off of their measurements (The Z9D was measured to be a better and brighter picture than the 900e, orders magnitude better in terms of brightness.).

Too many top of the line TVs are given the same, or near the same mixed use score. They need to normalize that by taking a look at the distribution. There HAS to be some kind of TV that you can go wrong with buying.

by your logic the Q60R is a better tv than the Z9D. it does have the better contrast ratio after all. we should make you a fan page.
Mikejl and sd13 like this.
ray0414 is offline  
post #2268 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
by your logic the Q60R is a better tv than the Z9D. it does have the better contrast ratio after all. we should make you a fan page.
The Z9D also has substantially better local dimming that would reduce blooming (while also increasing overall contrast over the Q60R...which it measurably does), as well as VASTLY superior HDR performance (as I did mention brightness in that post).

Bear in mind that those were just a few handpicked stats used as an example - there are many other variables in measuring the quality of a TV (color gamut, off axis viewing, gray and black uniformity, etc.)

I am not exactly interested in writing an essay comparing two television sets to illustrate a basic point in where I find Rtings useful as a website.
crono311 is offline  
post #2269 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
by your logic the Q60R is a better tv than the Z9D. it does have the better contrast ratio after all. we should make you a fan page.
I think I'm gonna trade in my q90r for a 2015 Vizio m series or a $500 ju6500 that has better contrast cause measurements never lie lol.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
sd13 is online now  
post #2270 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
So going by rtings score, you believe the z9f and the q900rb have worse contrast than the ju6500?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
For the test pattern that they used, its certainly possible. Rtings wasnt the only site that mentioned the poor black level quality of the Z9F, as well.
And, as others would mention, contrast ratio doesnt explain the whole story in terms of picture quality....it is one measure of it (and, very often, it is a fairly good measure - but no one measurement is the be all, end all of the set). My understanding when it comes to the experience of the Z9F is that you would benefit from its brightness and motion processing, as well as better viewing angles.

These are measurably better than what is on the JU6500.

Again - I just gave a few of their measurements as an example as to why Rtings is a very effective resource to go to when evaluating a television, but they aren't a one stop shop.

No resource is.
Terminader and Lyner like this.
crono311 is offline  
post #2271 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Slickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 495 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Contrast ratio is a joke with the dawn of HDR. All OLED's get pegged as infinite. You would think infinite would be world's better than 8,000 but you put a Z9D next to an OLED it will destroy the OLED on some scenes with it's puny 8,000 contrast. 🙄 Likewise the Q90R would also destroy an OLED on some scenes. 😎
Slickman is offline  
post #2272 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:38 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slickman View Post
Contrast ratio is a joke with the dawn of HDR. All OLED's get pegged as infinite. You would think infinite would be world's better than 8,000 but you put a Z9D next to an OLED it will destroy the OLED on some scenes with it's puny 8,000 contrast. 🙄 Likewise the Q90R would also destroy an OLED on some scenes. 😎
I wouldn't say it is a joke - black levels (which directly impact the measurement of contrast) absolutely matter. The Z9F was maligned entirely because of it.

Bright highlights don't mean much when the darker parts of the image are grey. Limits the impact.

But that said - there is a point where contrast means substantially less since going deeper than near black is imperceptible. And to that point, I agree with saying there is a limit to caring about the CR measurement.

But also clocking in at 1730:1 isnt something to disregard.
Gillietalls, iphilologos and Lyner like this.
crono311 is offline  
post #2273 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Terminader's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: California
Posts: 1,982
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
Rtings is more reputable than all the other ones that gave it 5 stars because you say so? I don't care if these reviews rate the q90r at 1 nit, 1% color volume and 100:1 contrast ratio. I owned the q9fn and although this set is not perfect, it blows that one away big time. Better shadow detail, game mode that isn't broken, no undersaturation in sdr, no black crush, better upscaling, way way lower amount of dse to name a few reasons why this one is a definite improvement. And I went through 5 of those sets so panel lottery is definitely not the reason I'm saying this.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
And you are not the only owner that is happy so far with the Q90R. I own an 82 inch and my mom has one too. Over the next few weeks I will be calibrating without a meter to see if there are any improvements. Out of the box, I am very satisfied so far. No issues!

2019 82" Q90R, 2016 55" and 65" KS8000, Denon S720 AVR
Mikejl, sd13, South Park and 1 others like this.
Terminader is offline  
post #2274 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Slickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 495 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post
I wouldn't say it is a joke - black levels (which directly impact the measurement of contrast) absolutely matter. The Z9F was maligned entirely because of it.

Bright highlights don't mean much when the darker parts of the image are grey. Limits the impact.

But that said - there is a point where contrast means substantially less since going deeper than near black is imperceptible. And to that point, I agree with saying there is a limit to caring about the CR measurement.

But also clocking in at 1730:1 isnt something to disregard.
Yes you are correct, it is definitely important. The whole infinite bullcrap is what gets me. It's like saying I can run infinitely fast because I can also go 0 mph. 🙄
Terminader and iphilologos like this.
Slickman is offline  
post #2275 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post
I wouldn't say it is a joke - black levels (which directly impact the measurement of contrast) absolutely matter. The Z9F was maligned entirely because of it.



Bright highlights don't mean much when the darker parts of the image are grey. Limits the impact.



But that said - there is a point where contrast means substantially less since going deeper than near black is imperceptible. And to that point, I agree with saying there is a limit to caring about the CR measurement.



But also clocking in at 1730:1 isnt something to disregard.
We get it. You recently purchased a q9fn and you're trying to reassure yourself that you made the correct decision. You don't need numbers to tell you that, just go enjoy your set.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Mikejl, Terminader and South Park like this.
sd13 is online now  
post #2276 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:57 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
We get it. You recently purchased a q9fn and you're trying to reassure yourself that you made the correct decision. You don't need numbers to tell you that, just go enjoy your set.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
:P

Maybe not, but now that I got the bug, I may be joining the rest of this forum in swapping out sets on a near yearly basis if the upgrade is worth it (and the Q90R is getting buzz like none other).

I am eagerly waiting to see how the Q90R performs throughout their measurements, not just for that purpose, but I am very curious just to see what Samsung's overall strategy was for this years lineup.

The quality sounds like it is all over the place.
Lyner likes this.
crono311 is offline  
post #2277 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 12:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sd13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1165 Post(s)
Liked: 1081
Quote:
Originally Posted by crono311 View Post
:P



Maybe not, but now that I got the bug, I may be joining the rest of this forum in swapping out sets on a near yearly basis if the upgrade is worth it (and the Q90R is getting buzz like none other).



I am eagerly waiting to see how the Q90R performs throughout their measurements, not just for that purpose, but I am very curious just to see what Samsung's overall strategy was for this years lineup.



The quality sounds like it is all over the place.
What do you mean all over the place? The q9fn quality was stable on comparison?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Mikejl and Terminader like this.
sd13 is online now  
post #2278 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 01:10 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Q

Quote:
Originally Posted by sd13 View Post
What do you mean all over the place? The q9fn quality was stable on comparison?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Barring the difference from the Q6 and the NU8000, The QLED lineup got progressively better TVs for the prices you were paying (ideally, at least. It sounds like you ran into some horrid DSE issues, and it took awhile for the local dimming to be improved from what I understand on the Q9).

If you got the intro level Q6, you were paying for appreciably wider color than the NU8000, even if it was a price premium of a couple hundred dollars (at least once prices adjusted a few months after release). Q7 gave you a much brighter picture, whereas the Q8 and Q9 had FALD that helped deliver a punchier picture with better blacks that the lower two couldn't achieve.

As of right now, the Q900RB is showing odd measurements with its picture - how the black levels are measured as they are, I don't know. The Q60 review was beyond disappointing, and a clear step back from the Q6FN.

Abt electronics also posted a review comparing the Q80 and Q70, noting that the Q70 handles shadow detail much better than the Q80 does. Granted, that is just one review, but it just wasn't at all what I would expect - and not really in line with what happened with last year's lineup.

So now I am interested in how the Q90 performs. If it has the wide angles, and vastly better contrast, it would be perplexing why their luxury model didnt perform as well.

Moreover, it would feel like a gut punch to consumers from Samsung if there was only one model worth getting this year. Last year I felt each were worth it for their respective prices (well, once a modest price drop set in).
crono311 is offline  
post #2279 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 01:29 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Graham View Post
What's your source for that?


Are you referring to the article that quoted Cohen saying that eARC is not needed because of the streaming apps?
Yes, Cohen is the senior manager for product training and makes it pretty clear to me at least that this feature is not showing up for 2019 which is quite unfortunate, especially as Samsung has products at the other end of the connection chain (soundbar, etc.) that would benefit from it and do have the feature enabled;

Quote:
The Q60, Q70, Q80, Q90 and Q900 series boost frame rates to 120fps for 2K and 2.5K content, and the Q90 and 8K Q900 series boosts 4K frame rates to 120fps. The 8K series also supports 8K at 60fps through its HDMI inputs.

The Samsung TVs, however, don’t support HDMI 2.1’s eARC (enhanced Audio Return Channel). In Samsung’s estimation, eARC isn’t needed because smart-TV streaming services are delivering immersive Dolby Atmos metadata via Dolby Digital Plus soundtracks, Cohen said.

These soundtracks pass through a TV’s standard ARC output to ARC-equipped AVRs and sound bars.

That’s adequate for most Samsung customers interested in immersive sound, he said
Apparently those who plunk down great big coinage for Samsung's top end TVs need to settle for 'adequate'.

Ok cool. So they didn't actually say any of the things you said. I was worried.

Senior Manager for Product Training sounds like a fluffy name for marketing guy who demonstrates the TV to people. It's unlikely he know much about the actual technology or can speak to future upgrades, at least until he given a script to read.

That said, I wasn't thrilled with the statement either. My guess, it was a poor attempt to reduce the negative impact of the tvs not currently having earc, but nothing towards future intentions.

Question for, Q9fn owners here... How long before the update did you know that the tvs would get Vrr and ALLM?
Terminader and Lyner like this.

Last edited by Donald Graham; 04-08-2019 at 01:46 PM.
Donald Graham is offline  
post #2280 of 6682 Old 04-08-2019, 02:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thirdkind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Plasma View Post
Does not sound normal, however if you like your panel you may want to think about swapping it, you could end up with something worse.....
That's my fear. The panel is pretty much perfect otherwise, and this is the kind of thing most people probably wouldn't even notice. I only see it in select scenes and it varies based on viewing angle, so maybe I just need to relax and enjoy.
thirdkind is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

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