AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a chance to trade in my 42"GWIII for a 42"GWIV. Are there any differences in terms of image quality between the 2? Are the blacks any better? My GWIII has been calibrated and looks awesome but this may be too good of a deal to pass up. I have the HD comming in through DVI via TWCNY and the Zenith 318 through comp. Any opinions are welcome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,078 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Ricfutures
I have a chance to trade in my 42"GWIII for a 42"GWIV. Are there any differences in terms of image quality between the 2? Are the blacks any better? My GWIII has been calibrated and looks awesome but this may be too good of a deal to pass up. I have the HD comming in through DVI via TWCNY and the Zenith 318 through comp. Any opinions are welcome.
I saw the III next to the IV and the IV looked a little better to me (blacks a little blacker), but it could have been a calibration issue.


You need to weigh the issues and how important they are to you:


- Trading in a used product for a new one, vs. the inconvenience of having to do so

- Do you really want to recalibrate the new set, especially if you are happy with the PQ of the set you have?

- Do you want the tuner in the GWIV?

- Cosmetically, do you like the black speakers on the GWIII or the silver on the GWIV?


Only you can answer these questions. I think the PQ difference is either negligible or non-existent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks, I could really care less about the tuner since TWCNYC requires a box, I prefer the black/blue spreaders, looks more professional IMO. I was really concerned with PQ. I'll keep mine. Thanks again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,368 Posts
I own a GW III and i've seen the newer GW IV in stores recently. Performance wise they look nearly identical to me. If I could choose though i'd exchange my GW III for the IV. Only because of the cable card though.


However, I prefer the look of the GW III so it would be a tough call.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I actually traded a 42†GWIII for GWIV since I could do so for very little additional investment. I can not really see any change in blacks but the tuner in the GWIV is vastly better than the external HD (Pace) box provided by Brighthouse. I am very happy I made the switch,


-Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by kevlo9
From what I've read the two are the same PQ wise. The only difference I could tell is the GWIV's have enhanced audio, cable card slot, and an HD tuner.
sony is not really adverstising it well, but i was told by a national trainer that the optical block has been redesigned to yield a 10% increase in overall brightness and an unspecified improvement in contrast ratio.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
national trainer.. ha.

So how many rungs up the ladder is he from my mgr friend at best buy?

j/k

This was the same type of answer i got when i asked the sony rep at the nyc show. Said the new units have "better black". When i asked him about the xs and xbr, he couldnt tell me which one would have the "better black" even though the xs is new and the xbr remains unchanged.


I think if they had made such changes, sony would have advertised the crap out of them. Prob, give it another acronym and marketing tag.


asfaik, the new wf models have a higher watt bulb, i think this yrs and last yrs WE series are identical, pq wise. This is from staring intently at the sony store displays down the street from me, and comparing against my own, so its by no means scientific. Like i said, if sony had made any real changes, they would probably advertise the sh!t out of them. The optical block and better black line is prob what they feed their sales n marktg ppl. Just my hunch.


K
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
I don't know if it was b/c the GWIII was a year old, but it's brightness level could not touch the GWIV I pulled out of the box (I work at a retailer). The new menu system is a lot nicer and I'm happy to see input-specific video settings. The GWIV is so bright, I almost would believe that it is gonna burn out in a few months. It's really bright. I toned it down to reality and this set is very strong next to the Panny 43". I wasn't a Sony LCD fan until this year...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,407 Posts
If you think back, when you got your GWIII new out of the box, it was real bright too. The only comparison that would work would be to put a new bulb in a GWIII and then compare it to the GWIV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I might be stepping out of line asking this question in this thread but I am almost ready to trigger purchasing a 42" GW IV and need a quick answer. Can someone tell me what is the footprint dimension for the GW IV? I need to go find a TV stand for the unit.


Thanks in advance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by kyungkim
national trainer.. ha.

So how many rungs up the ladder is he from my mgr friend at best buy?

j/k

This was the same type of answer i got when i asked the sony rep at the nyc show. Said the new units have "better black". When i asked him about the xs and xbr, he couldnt tell me which one would have the "better black" even though the xs is new and the xbr remains unchanged.


I think if they had made such changes, sony would have advertised the crap out of them. Prob, give it another acronym and marketing tag.


asfaik, the new wf models have a higher watt bulb, i think this yrs and last yrs WE series are identical, pq wise. This is from staring intently at the sony store displays down the street from me, and comparing against my own, so its by no means scientific. Like i said, if sony had made any real changes, they would probably advertise the sh!t out of them. The optical block and better black line is prob what they feed their sales n marktg ppl. Just my hunch.


K
well, i know he is one of five national product trainers from sony and he is fed his information directly from japan. not saying he is always right, but he wouldn't have trained on it if someone higher up didn't tell him to include it into his trainings. and i can think of multiple times when a manufacturer (sony certainly included) has not advertised a feature or technological improvement well. it happens pretty much everytime new models come out... they focus on some things (like the cableCARD tuner), but neglect to mention ALL the advancements the engineers made. it's exactly the reason you see so many threads on this board asking what the differences are between two models (like this one). if sony advertised the crap out of all these advancements, there would be no need for any of these threads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,407 Posts
yet most these threads only repeat what the manufacturers say.


The only time we get a different level of information is when UMR or one of the other engineer types dig through some schematics to tell us stuff that conflicts with what the manufacturer is saying.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,544 Posts
Not all changes to the GWIV's are an improvement. The change from 3D to 2D comb filtering is a negative. I would not be surprised to find that other things have been "cheapened" up. New models are sometimes better and sometimes worse. The primary goal appears to be getting the cost down not improving quality. This is in the face of having to include an HD tuner and cable card. These things are still pretty expensive.


Don't get me wrong there are improvements in these sets, but they may not offset things that are being done to reduce the cost of manufacturing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Ricfutures
Thanks, I could really care less about the tuner since TWCNYC requires a box, I prefer the black/blue spreaders, looks more professional IMO. I was really concerned with PQ. I'll keep mine. Thanks again.
Actually, TWC is susposed to support cablecard so in theory you don't require a box.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by umr
Not all changes to the GWIV's are an improvement. The change from 3D to 2D comb filtering is a negative. I would not be surprised to find that other things have been "cheapened" up. New models are sometimes better and sometimes worse. The primary goal appears to be getting the cost down not improving quality. This is in the face of having to include an HD tuner and cable card. These things are still pretty expensive.


Don't get me wrong there are improvements in these sets, but they may not offset things that are being done to reduce the cost of manufacturing.
Why would anyone care about the comb filter these days? The only time the comb filter in my GWII gets used is when I play a VHS tape (almost never and it looks like crap whatever the comb filter). The only comb filter I actually use is the one in my Tivo. Anyone using the analog tuner would use the built in comb filter, but analog channels also look pretty bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
Sorry, i still wouldnt trust a national trainer, even if he were the head trainer for all of north america. If he were an engineer or on the product dev team, maybe.


Maybe the optical block redesign was to ensure that phillips lamps wouldnt burn out within the first 40days.(like mine did) I guess that would be kinda hard to fit on one of those point of sales placards. hee hee.


I find my expereince with TVs to be quite different, almost all improvement, albeit however minor, are quite heavily marketed.

With guys like hitachi and mitsubish, they market everything from lens arrays to phosphor coatings on their crts.


Most of the discussions on places like this revolve around how these marketing labels apply in the real world.


Most of the times when things are steathily re engineered, its sneaky things like the 3d comb filter downgrade. I think thats a dick move on sony's part, but like adgrant, i dont have any use for it anyway.


Dont get me wrong, I have no idea if the optical block was re engineered to yield those improvements, i just think its unlikely.

And where the rubber meets the road, i dont think theres a difference pq wise from this yrs to last yrs WE series.


K
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
40" wide and looks like 16" deep at the center of the pedestal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Most of the buying public doesn't know what good PQ is and even less could tell you what is responsible for it.

Product trainers focus on the things most people understand. Price, convenience, a stand that matches; You know, stuff that's important to your wife. ;-0


Not suprising even a national trainer is technologically clueless.


Eric
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by ADGrant
Why would anyone care about the comb filter these days? The only time the comb filter in my GWII gets used is when I play a VHS tape (almost never and it looks like crap whatever the comb filter). The only comb filter I actually use is the one in my Tivo. Anyone using the analog tuner would use the built in comb filter, but analog channels also look pretty bad.
I was wondering the same thing. I thought a comb filter only worked on things set to composite inputs. If you are watch material fed through component and HDMI, what affect would a 3D comb filter have versus a 2D comb filter?
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top