Today, THX announces its latest project—the THX Standard website. Serving as an adjunct to the company's consumer-electronics certification program, the new website offers the results of detailed measurements performed on various A/V products. It also provides scores based on those measurements, which follow the rigorous procedures developed for the THX certification program, as well as an overall score calculated from the individual scores. Even better, it lets you compare the scores, individual measurements, and manufacturer-provided specifications for up to three products in a table.

Click here for more...

It seemed like THX had kind of died when they pulled most of their website after the most recent acquisition. I certainly wasn't expecting this, but it's pretty cool to see more objective measurements of gear after years of ridiculously esoteric audio reviews. Let's hope it's less controversial than the photography equivalent, www.DxOMark.com.

I find it odd that the Sony X900E rates better than the LG Oleds or the Sony X930E/940E models. It's the opposite in nearly every other review that I have seen.

They are testing with Out of the Box settings using the displays' cinema modes. Not after calibration.

Could it be that they are trying to encourage manufacturers to calibrate their products ala TCL Series 6 before sending them out of the factory?

From https://www.avsforum.com/first-look-t...-dolby-vision/

“An iPQ engine is really designed to deliver accurate color out of the box without any need for calibration"

Plus, the LG exhibited a couple of visible artifacts that the Sony did not. That reduced the overall score of the LG. Had it not been for those artifacts, the LG would have come out on top.

Even so, if you look at scores by individual measurement, the LG would appear to come out on top. The site doesn't indicate which individual scores are weighted higher or lower to determine the overall rating.

As I explained in the article, the individual scores are not weighted when it comes to calculating the overall score for TVs. They are weighted for amps and speakers, but not TVs.

So, to calculate the overall score for a TV, add up the 10 individual scores (not including the "Visible Artifacts") and divide by 10, then subtract 5 points for each visible artifact. Doing this for the Sony X900E and LG B7A, you get a final overall score of 73 and 70, respectively. If the LG had had one visible artifact instead of two, it would have gotten a 75. If it had had no visible artifacts, it would have gotten an 80.

LG OLED55B7A-U Artifacts Mentioned

• Image Retention or Sticking - NO points deducted
  Center test box is seen in this Imaging Photometer picture of a near black screen.
  "Pixel Refresher" mode fixes minor issues like this.
  Static image after effect can be seen on any other image shown, easiest on flat white or black.
• Picture Position Shift
  Overscan of 1080p image shifts to the right.
  Errors in display scaling and positioning where the picture is not centered correctly.
• Mura
  These vertical striped errors have only a 0.22 cd/m² variance but are visible in near black images.
  Cloudy and streaky areas of the panel caused by an uneven surface or other mechanical panel issues.

I'd like to seem them test the 2018 televisions:

Sony XBR-55X900F
Sony XBR-55A8F
LG OLED55C8PUA
TCL 55R617
Vizio P55-F1
Vizio PQ65-F1
Samsung 55Q8FN
Samsung 65Q9FN

Me too!

Thanks Scott, got it. I got all excited and zipped right over to the site.. I didn't realize that artifacts weren't graded the same way as the other categories.

I'm surprised to see the Emotiva XPA-7 fare so poorly against the competition, I had been under the impression that it was a well regarded design.

This looks like it could be a great tool once they add more gear to their lists.

I like their Blu-ray player, amp/avr certifications for sure, have seen videos of some of the process. This is going to make some amp and avr makers squirm.

As far as TV's go, most of us can glean here which tv to buy, or we already know by talking to a calibrator. I did like the THX mode on Panny plasmas when they did not have CMS Adjustments, the LUT's were pretty accurate.

If you look at their HDR Performance measurements, the 930E seems to have less variation in the 'Brightness & Accuracy' graph and also has higher Peak Luminance measurements (good according to their comments) in each of the 4 categories, yet for some reason, it's rated much poorer (48) for HDR Performance that the 900E at 68 .. and thus this drags down the overall score.

The X1 processor does not handle HDR as well? I have the 930E and HDR looks amazing, very close to OLED. Something is wrong with this picture!

Agreed, why is does the 930e have a lower HDR score than the 900e?

what exactly are these "artifacts"..... just out of curiosity

Wow, definitely was not expecting this! Looks like Rtings.com has some competition.

The artifacts are listed on the THX website: http://www.thxstandard.com/

I noticed subwoofers are not included in their evaluations

This is hilarious...i don't even know where to begin.

I would be somewhat encouraged if I was 30 yrs younger...somehow I dont feel the same towards ratings as I used to be when young.

Nice to see the detailed amplifier measurements.

Agreed, not only that but their #1 tested amp out of only four initial multi-channel amps is a 2002 model Anthem PVA7 that 16 years old (??) and listed as being rated at 200W of power/channel at 8 ohms in their description (??) while Anthem list the current Anthem PVA7 at 125W 1-channel driven and 105W with all channels driven at 8 ohms (which THX at least got right under their spec section).

http://www.thxstandard.com/#!/catego...ifiers/sub/42/

http://www.thxstandard.com/#!/product/23/

https://www.anthemav.com/products-cu...a-7/page=specs

THX also lists Power Burst scores but provides no explanation of the test nor provides any test results under the measurement section - Seems like there's more work to be done because if you want to be a testing and scoring resource you got to get the details right!

Because if you're inconsistent and screw up the easy stuff - how do I know that you're consistent enough to get the hard stuff right?

I've been saying that the AHB2 is a great amp, but there is always someone that has some subjective opinion about the amps sound and how its no good. Still using mine and it sounds excellent and obviously measures excellent as well. it's so good that it is whisper quiet even with horns. I would use no other amp at this point and I consider it the pinnacle of all amp technology.

I also have the NAD M27 with Ncore and these are also very good, just not as quiet as the AHB2. They are cheaper per channel which becomes a factor for Atmos.

Today, I would likely go for the ATI Ncore multichannel if cost were a factor.

Cost no object, a rack full of AHB2's would be "best" but clearly overkill for anything beyond front soundstage speakers.

I have heard the nad amp...but havent heard the rest...so it all means nothing yet...maybe they get more than .0001% of stuff to compare

Not yet, but hopefully soon...

Not sure how you came to this conclusion. Go to any of the power amps and click on the Burst Power item in the Product Scores list. You will find a detailed explanation and measurement results.

For example, go here and click on the Burst Power item in the Product Scores list.

Go to any TV's individual page on the site and click on the Visible Artifacts item in the Product Scores list. You will see a list of all the visible artifacts that THX looks for.

For example, go here and click on the Visible Artifacts item in the Product Scores list.