AVS Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was at the SonyStyle store recently and I did get to look at the cute 11" OLED that they had on display. I had seen many pictures before and I do agree that in a well setup situation it does produce a great picture. But from what I understand, one of the bonuses to OLED is that it can be made paper thin. I do see the usefulness of this in the near future and I have read about how Sony has developed a flexible OLED display, which is amazing! But looking at the 11" OLED from sony and seeing how thin it is, I just do not understand why they can't make an LCD close to as thin as that. What I am talking about, is that all of the panel's hardware is in the base of the unit with an arm that supports the panel and connects the hardware to the display. When I saw this, I thought to myself "Don't laptops work in essentially the same way with LCD screens?" Now I understand that LCDs do require a substantial backlight for brightness and that takes up quite a bit more space than an OLED, but why hasn't anyone made a half inch thick (or less) LCD TV with a base/stand that houses all of the hardware components much like Sony did with their OLED display? Is there something that disallows this use of an LCD that I do not understand or know of?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
Now that Flat Panel manufacturers have so little to truly set themselves apart from the competition they are branching out into niches. CES 2008 was packed with super thin Plasma and LCD prototypes, over the coming years those prototypes are going to become units people can actually buy.


In other words, just wait, they are coming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,615 Posts
I have recently seen a Hitachi LCD that was much thinner that the norm for sale at a BB store here in CA.


Really there is a limit that you want to get when it comes to thin. As a engineer doing design, reviewing other peoples designs, and repair of equipment, there are a few things that I realize and the first is THIN IS NOT ALWAYS A GOOD THING.


Take that little 11" screen and scale it up to 46" at the same thickness. It is now not cool to be thin, but something that is very fragile and easy to break. There are good qualities to having something built with a heavy duty frame, protection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,061 Posts
I would think that a large size OLED display would need some thickness just to add the rigidity needed to keep the screen flat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by TPkurash /forum/post/14327035


I was at the SonyStyle store recently and I did get to look at the cute 11" OLED that they had on display. I had seen many pictures before and I do agree that in a well setup situation it does produce a great picture. But from what I understand, one of the bonuses to OLED is that it can be made paper thin. I do see the usefulness of this in the near future and I have read about how Sony has developed a flexible OLED display, which is amazing! But looking at the 11" OLED from sony and seeing how thin it is, I just do not understand why they can't make an LCD close to as thin as that. What I am talking about, is that all of the panel's hardware is in the base of the unit with an arm that supports the panel and connects the hardware to the display. When I saw this, I thought to myself "Don't laptops work in essentially the same way with LCD screens?" Now I understand that LCDs do require a substantial backlight for brightness and that takes up quite a bit more space than an OLED, but why hasn't anyone made a half inch thick (or less) LCD TV with a base/stand that houses all of the hardware components much like Sony did with their OLED display? Is there something that disallows this use of an LCD that I do not understand or know of?

I personally think the space BEHIND the panel is wasted at least to some extent. I'd much prefer some depth to the display rather than yet another box you need to find room for. The only case where thinner is better is when the display is on the wall with nothing around it. When you add the center speaker and align the panel with the speaker's front, screen depth simply isn't a factor. Space behind the panel could be used for power amps, faceless sources like satellite receivers, etc. You could even build a center speaker that used that space for cabinet volume to improve LF response.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,852 Posts
The OLED display at sonystyle is actually cbunkier than my TZ series notebook and feding a DVD into the OLED from a PS3 that was connected to it wasn't any better than DVD on the TZ series notebook! So, THA* specific display is more hype than substance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,615 Posts
I saw the Hitachi set again and it is 1.5 inches. There is another set (I think Sharp or Samsung) that is promising an inch thick.


While this is nice, there are limits to how far you can take this. I am like the previous poster and think that moving allot of the electronics to a separate console would be a pain if it were just to get a "Thinner" profile.


I read some time ago that Sharp was experimenting with putting some of the support electronics on the TFT glass itself to reduce the space needed for support electronics. So far (at that time) they had done this with cell phone displays, and were looking at larger applications.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,225 Posts
My entirely conventional 2007-vintage Samsung is slightly more than 4" thick. Part of this is a steel chassis that provides rigidity and mounts all the heavy components like the panel, power supply, speakers, etc.


Am I ever glad I did not get one of the low profile wall mounts. I have used all three HDMI inputs, the PC input, and one of the component video inputs. The almost 3" of space between the recessed connector panel on the back and the wall surface is barely enough for these bulky connectors.


I don't know why it never happened, but one of the advantages to the digital interfaces was supposed to be a daisy chain connection of a single slender cable or fiber. What we have instead is another radial interconnect scheme, HDMI is hardly any better although it saves a few cables.


I would not pay extra money or replace what I have for the sake of panel thinness. The equipment cabinet below the HDTV is 23" deep and 2" off the wall, anyway. I will examine any prospective replacement HDTV carefully for the usability of the connector panel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,615 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary McCoy /forum/post/14422252


My entirely conventional 2007-vintage Samsung is slightly more than 4" thick. Part of this is a steel chassis that provides rigidity and mounts all the heavy components like the panel, power supply, speakers, etc.


Am I ever glad I did not get one of the low profile wall mounts. I have used all three HDMI inputs, the PC input, and one of the component video inputs. The almost 3" of space between the recessed connector panel on the back and the wall surface is barely enough for these bulky connectors.


I don't know why it never happened, but one of the advantages to the digital interfaces was supposed to be a daisy chain connection of a single slender cable or fiber. What we have instead is another radial interconnect scheme, HDMI is hardly any better although it saves a few cables.


I would not pay extra money or replace what I have for the sake of panel thinness. The equipment cabinet below the HDTV is 23" deep and 2" off the wall, anyway. I will examine any prospective replacement HDTV carefully for the usability of the connector panel.

I have also had to get behind the set on the wall and run new cables, having a low profile wall mount would have made that almost impposible for me to do by my self.


My set is also around 4" thick and there is a recessed area on one end that all the to cables plug in without much of a problem. I can't imagine what it would be like if I had a super thin set and had to do the same thing. I would have to cut a hole in the wall to make the cables fit.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top