Originally Posted by sillysally
I am quoting David and his measured black levels on the 940C at the shoot out.
Understand David uses a reference meter to take those measurements, Chad uses a D3 meter non reference. Chads reference meter that he uses to make a profile matrix for his D3 meter needed a calibration.
You also said you don't like the word "Tricks" when referring to the black's on the 960C. That is exactly what you are referring to when you reference Chad's post.
I suggest you learn how to read calibration reports, and also reread David's calibration report once you understand how to read a calibration report.
So as usual you are 100% incorrect, when saying I was., . Please edit your post.
Once again, you are 100% wrong. Period. And as usual you are 100% condescending. Yes, I know how to read calibration charts, but it's you that doesn't seem to understand one CR from another or what they mean. I find this surprising from the guy who obviously thinks of himself as the foremost calibrator of our time.
You obviously do NOT understand how FALD works. Your statements couldn't make that more obvious.
The measurements that David took was the NATIVE CR OF THE PANEL
. What part of that don't you understand? FALD was NOT
engaged. Those are not the CR #s
the eye sees when FALD is engaged. You taking the lowest number you can find does not change the black levels of the 940c with FALD engaged. It does not Peter. It simply does not.
Did you even notice that David posted ONE CR number and Chad posted multiple CR #s
? Do you have any idea why? Apparently not. Chad posted native, FALD at medium and FALD at high.
Don't you notice that Chad's measurements with FALD turned OFF are virtually identical to David's? That's because those numbers are measuring the same thing! Chad posted ADDITIONAL numbers with the FALD engaged. Those are the ones you wish would go away. Aside from the actual numbers, did you also notice Chad's written description of the contrast the Sony is capable of? Apparently not. Do you think he would have used that descriptive if the best the Sony was capable of was the native CR? Geesh! Unreal.
With FALD turned ON, you'll see what the real CR numbers & black levels look like. It's THOSE numbers that are precisely what I'm seeing and why I keep saying the black levels on the Sony are truly excellent. Better than any plasma or LCD to come before it.
You are determined to knock anything not OLED and are being disingenuous by ignoring the truth, but I can be objective about both. Yes, OLED is still capable of better black levels, but the black levels of the 940c are so good, I don't miss the OLED blacks.
Aside from that, the Sony processing is much better than the LG and the HD is sharper and cleaner with the superior upscaling of the Sony.