AVS Forum banner

101 - 120 of 367 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,068 Posts
A sidebar here - there's also the issue of eye perception. Not everyone perceives vision the same way. Clarity, color, brightness and contrast perception vary by individual, sometimes to significant extents. There's a reason people wear glasses - it's to correct their perception of the world. Is it "correct"? Actually, probably not, it's just better than it used to be. What to one person can be a wonderfully stable picture, to another can be a vibrating juttering mess. I personally have issues with refresh rates, in the hi-res CRT monitor days anything under 74Hz was like watching a pulsating band or bright blob scan across the screen, while a colleague was perfectly happy with those same settings. I have friend who has significantly degraded color sensitivity between R&G, he's close to color blind, but can still sense bright reds of certain shades. That samsung might actually look better to him.

Me? I happen to despise sharpening, motion blur, and anything that produces artifacts/banding in the signal. As HD came in, and cable providers compressed the hell out of it - I moved to different providers and eventually dropped cable/satellite entirely - opting for OTA and a personal video library rather than dealing with various degradations in my viewing experience.

This is so true, everyone perceive colors,contrast,brightness,sharpness,motion differently. No one have the exact perception, even woman's have better color vision than mens, they can see more shades of colors than mens. Thanks for bringing this up 👍🏻.


I have brightness sensitivity
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cam1977

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,171 Posts
This is so true, everyone perceive colors,contrast,brightness,sharpness,motion differently. No one have the exact perception, even woman's have better color vision than mens, they can see more shades of colors than mens. Thanks for bringing this up 👍🏻.


I have brightness sensitivity
Not only do people have different perceptions and sensitivities, but they also have different tastes. I remember reading a post from someone who watched everything in Vivid mode!:eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Why I chose Sony over LG.

1. I tend to watch about 60-70% 1080p content. With that being the case, I want the best upscaling in the business. Currently, that honor goes to Sony.

2. I want the best color accuracy, post calibration, just as director intended. According to my eye and that of my touring calibrator, that goes to Sony. LG is pretty good though.

3. I want the best motion available. Again, according to my calibrator, he states the Sony A9G is the best he has seen yet for any Oled, matching or exceeding that of his Pioneer Kuro. I too have a Kuro, and I agree. It’s close though.

4. I want a TV that I believe is built better, with excellent qc and will likely last longer than others. I personally believe Sony takes that honor too, based on their track record.

5. I want the a design that sets the tv apart from run of the mills. Sony A9G subjectively meets that need for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,016 Posts
^thats very well put, no one can argue with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
595 Posts
Has lg gotten better with uniformity on the cx? Or is it still a crapshoot? Still have time to decide if an a8h, or cx will be replacing my a1e.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,171 Posts
Has lg gotten better with uniformity on the cx? Or is it still a crapshoot? Still have time to decide if an a8h, or cx will be replacing my a1e.
That would be a great question for John ("jrref" here on AVS forum). He does the calibrations at Value Electronics, where they offer break-in/calibration of brand new displays. They sell both LG and Sony OLEDs, and would be in the best position to see many of both brands right out-of-the-box and therefore to tell you whether there are uniformity issues (i.e., panel lottery issues) with either the A8H or CX. Just send him a PM in case he doesn't visit this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,812 Posts
-The OOTB settings must need help on the Sony A8H as you posted this: "I’ve vetted and stand by the settings I’ve posted. They are not a substitute for a calibration but are far better than anything available OOTB. Next time I’m in NYC, I’ll swing by Robert’s, put my settings on one of his Sony OLEDs in the store, measure it with my equipment and post the results here. Easy Peasy."

-The blanket statement that I responded to in the first place: "We are talking about out of the box color accuracy in that regards Sony is better obviously you can calibrate your LG OLED to get comparable accuracy. Some people cannot be bothered with the hassle and just want a tv with great accuracy that they can just hook up and watch." I do not agree with. I think some Sony's could be better OOTB and some LG's could be better OOTB. I decided to post examples so people would at least question that blanket statement. But it seems like my response is being questioned more.

-I do own an LG C8 which was professionally calibrated. I had the calibrator measure ISF dark in it's default setting and it had DE's of less that 3 across the board. So my personal experience with OOTB settings was favorable on my set. That being said if I was in the market today for a set I would probably get the Sony 8AH. Not because of the OOTB settings though. I would either plug in your settings or get it professionally calibrated.
Ahh, I missed the blanket statement. They both need help OOTB unless you want to follow both LG and Sony idea of a Judd based grayscale.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,016 Posts
Has lg gotten better with uniformity on the cx? Or is it still a crapshoot? Still have time to decide if an a8h, or cx will be replacing my a1e.
I would say it's still a bit of a lottery, I just recently purchased a 65C9 and have a blob top left that only my camera picks up as well as tint...cant see it with naked eye...also no bands. Everything seen in this photo is overexposed by the camera.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
Ahh, I missed the blanket statement. They both need help OOTB unless you want to follow both LG and Sony idea of a Judd based grayscale.
I had my calibrator use your alternate white point coordinates. If I owe you a fee let me know:D. Unfortunately when I asked you to set up a calibration I couldn’t get enough Portlanders on board to make it worth your while to visit. Here is a blanket statement I am comfortable making: If one truly wants the best PQ from either a Sony or LG OLED having a good calibrator use a proper alternate white point will be a worthwhile investment.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,799 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: Cam1977

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,240 Posts
Hello all. Long post ahead. ..

Ok so let me start with “marketer” or “sales guy” terms used like pop & depth. IMO, the LG has a more 3D like, sharper image with a bit more color saturation, ESPECIALLY with 4K & HDR/Dolby Vision content. I think it’s just the difference in Sony VS LGs processing styles.

The A9G, like all other Sony sets I’ve owned, has a flatter, more film like, natural picture. It doesn’t have the drastic depth appearance that the LG has. There’s depth but just not as pronounced as the LG. This is done on purpose by Sony as they lean towards accuracy and creators intent. Which is also the reason why LG seems to have more pop due to the more saturated colors while Sony tries to have more accurate colors and cares less about a stand out picture that grabs your eye. I like a picture with a little more color and depth. I like a picture that looks like I’m actually there. I prefer this look over the accurate film like look now having experienced it after having Sony’s all these years. So those are my non technical/factual reasons for going with LG.
First time Sony A8G owner here ( prior LG OLED from Pio Elite 60 inch KURO ). I agree with everything you write here except for the better depth on the LG and is exactly why I bought the Sony late last year. The color on the LG is more saturated and would likely prefer it for CGI games but for but films, hands down, the Sony delivers a significantly superior PQ that is the closest I have seen since my KURO. Motion handling still slightly preferred on the Kuro as is less than HD source material. But the Sony actually reminds me in every other way to my Kuro but without the dithering. But of course has superior resolution, black levels, HDR/Dolby Vision to the KURO. I find that is a darkened environment ( the way I watch film ), the Sony has far more "depth" than the LG.


Now for the actual tech side. The Sony OLEDs have a problem with near black flashing and artifacting/macroblocking. I’m not sure if I’m using the right terms but I’m trying fellas. I noticed that the LG handles near black WAY better than Sony. I’ve heard it’s due to something called dithering, whatever that is. It was an annoying issue for me. Then the A9G seems to have audio issues with eARC and also an issue where it doesn’t detect a TV signal so it gives you the black Bravia screenSaver. These issues occurred WAY too often for a $5000 TV. Constantly hard resetting and switching sources isn’t a good thing. Turning off eARC helps with the audio but then my soundbar doesn’t output full Dolby Atmos. That’s a no go as well. I should have to turn off eARC. It should work properly. I shouldn’t have to turn off enhanced mode on my HDMI inputs to avoid the Bravia Screen. It should work as designed. So I decided to step out of Sony and try LG. My findings were surprising.
Here I must disagree with you, my Sony handles near black far better than LG and I seem to recall every professional reviewer stating this same conclusion. I am using Cinema Pro out of the box settings on the Sony and do not recall ever seeing any artifacting/macroblocking on UHD BluRays and regular BluRays. I do see some artifacting/macroblocking on streaming / cable channels but to a far less extent than on the LG.

The ARC on my Sony works flawlessly so cannot comment on the A9G eARC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
Discussion Starter #112
Hello all. Long post ahead. ..

Ok so let me start with “marketerâ€Â or “sales guyâ€Â terms used like pop & depth. IMO, the LG has a more 3D like, sharper image with a bit more color saturation, ESPECIALLY with 4K & HDR/Dolby Vision content. I think it’️s just the difference in Sony VS LGs processing styles.

The A9G, like all other Sony sets I’️ve owned, has a flatter, more film like, natural picture. It doesn’️t have the drastic depth appearance that the LG has. There’️s depth but just not as pronounced as the LG. This is done on purpose by Sony as they lean towards accuracy and creators intent. Which is also the reason why LG seems to have more pop due to the more saturated colors while Sony tries to have more accurate colors and cares less about a stand out picture that grabs your eye. I like a picture with a little more color and depth. I like a picture that looks like I’️m actually there. I prefer this look over the accurate film like look now having experienced it after having Sony’️s all these years. So those are my non technical/factual reasons for going with LG.
First time Sony A8G owner here ( prior LG OLED from Pio Elite 60 inch KURO ). I agree with everything you write here except for the better depth on the LG and is exactly why I bought the Sony late last year. The color on the LG is more saturated and would likely prefer it for CGI games but for but films, hands down, the Sony delivers a significantly superior PQ that is the closest I have seen since my KURO. Motion handling still slightly preferred on the Kuro as is less than HD source material. But the Sony actually reminds me in every other way to my Kuro but without the dithering. But with superior resolution, black levels, HDR/Dolby Vision. I find that is a darkened environment ( the way I watch film ), the Sony has far more "depth" than the LG.


Now for the actual tech side. The Sony OLEDs have a problem with near black flashing and artifacting/macroblocking. I’️m not sure if I’️m using the right terms but I’️m trying fellas. I noticed that the LG handles near black WAY better than Sony. I’️ve heard it’️s due to something called dithering, whatever that is. It was an annoying issue for me. Then the A9G seems to have audio issues with eARC and also an issue where it doesn’️t detect a TV signal so it gives you the black Bravia screenSaver. These issues occurred WAY too often for a $5000 TV. Constantly hard resetting and switching sources isn’️t a good thing. Turning off eARC helps with the audio but then my soundbar doesn’️t output full Dolby Atmos. That’️s a no go as well. I should have to turn off eARC. It should work properly. I shouldn’️t have to turn off enhanced mode on my HDMI inputs to avoid the Bravia Screen. It should work as designed. So I decided to step out of Sony and try LG. My findings were surprising.
Here I must disagree with you, my Sony handles near black far better than LG and I seem to recall every professional reviewer stating this same conclusion. I am using Cinema Pro out of the box settings on the Sony and do not recall ever seeing any artifacting/macroblocking on UHD BluRays and regular BluRays. I do see some artifacting/macroblocking on streaming / cable channels but to a far less extent than on the LG.

The ARC on my Sony works flawlessly so cannot comment on the A9G eARC.
The majority of the issues you stated you had with your LG has been mitigated with the CX/GX. I ONLY RECOMMEND THE CX/GX. Every other previous model of LG oled was inferior to the A9G. LG has corrected a lot of the issues I had in the past with their OLEDS on these 2020 models. The ONLY TVs I would buy on the market right now are the A9G/A8H or the CX/GX.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,240 Posts
The majority of the issues you stated you had with your LG has been mitigated with the CX/GX. I ONLY RECOMMEND THE CX/GX. Every other previous model of LG oled was inferior to the A9G. LG has corrected a lot of the issues I had in the past with their OLEDS on these 2020 models. The ONLY TVs I would buy on the market right now are the A9G/A8H or the CX/GX.
From what I have seen, the CX/GX absolutely still has Disneyland (oversaturated ) color but will take your word that they have improved the dithering/macroblocking for inferior sources as I have not viewed any inferior sources on the latest LGs...

I would buy the A8H if I did not buy the A8G but actually chose the A8G over the A9G and LG C9. C9 because of the issues I just posted about and the A9G because several professional reviewers gave the A8G a slight nod over the A9G for out of the box PQ. But the A9G is actually capable of finer adjustments making it preferred for those that will have it professionally calibrated. I could not tell the difference myself so had no reason to spend the money. I have no problem spending money, i.e. my KURO was 2X the price of the A9G but need to see the difference in PQ myself.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,240 Posts
The details in the Sony image are just so beautiful, natural and DISTINCT
Yes, this accurately describes the PQ that caused me to procure the Sony late last year after owning an LG and comparing with the C9...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,696 Posts
First time Sony A8G owner here ( prior LG OLED from Pio Elite 60 inch KURO ). I agree with everything you write here except for the better depth on the LG and is exactly why I bought the Sony late last year. The color on the LG is more saturated and would likely prefer it for CGI games but for but films, hands down, the Sony delivers a significantly superior PQ that is the closest I have seen since my KURO. Motion handling still slightly preferred on the Kuro as is less than HD source material. But the Sony actually reminds me in every other way to my Kuro but without the dithering. But of course has superior resolution, black levels, HDR/Dolby Vision to the KURO. I find that is a darkened environment ( the way I watch film ), the Sony has far more "depth" than the LG.




Here I must disagree with you, my Sony handles near black far better than LG and I seem to recall every professional reviewer stating this same conclusion. I am using Cinema Pro out of the box settings on the Sony and do not recall ever seeing any artifacting/macroblocking on UHD BluRays and regular BluRays. I do see some artifacting/macroblocking on streaming / cable channels but to a far less extent than on the LG.

The ARC on my Sony works flawlessly so cannot comment on the A9G eARC.

This is the kind of hyperbole that ultimately dooms these threads . I have owned both lg and Sony and there is no cartoon like color on lgs if they are in the appropriate mode . In fact I found the opposite of what you are saying to be true when comparing the cx and the a9g. At the end of the day both lgs and Sony’s produce a very similar picture when calibrated .

You may prefer one over the other but there is no vast gulf in pq between the two brands .


77CX YTTV AppleTv 4K Sony X800M2 Yamaha V685
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,240 Posts
This is the kind of hyperbole that ultimately dooms these threads . I have owned both lg and Sony and there is no cartoon like color on lgs if they are in the appropriate mode . In fact I found the opposite of what you are saying to be true when comparing the cx and the a9g. At the end of the day both lgs and Sony’s produce a very similar picture when calibrated .

You may prefer one over the other but there is no vast gulf in pq between the two brands .


77CX YTTV AppleTv 4K Sony X800M2 Yamaha V685
LOL. Maybe you missed the part where I mention that I was using cinemapro settings on the Sony A8G and the follow on where I mention out of the box PQ. I would agree that the PQ would be closer between LG and Sony if both were calibrated but for film would still give the nod to Sony and for games give the nod to the LG.

I am ISF Level II certified and calibrated my own TVs in the past. I agree that my Sony A8G OOB PQ is not as accurate as it would be if calibrated.

Joel Silver would likely go ape if read or heard me say the following but I actually prefer the Sony OOB cinemapro settings to a more accurate ISF calibration. Yes, I believe Sony intentionally provides a PQ that is very natural and film like in the default cinemapro settings even though it technically is not as accurate. I do not see any dithering with excellent shadow detail and black levels and excellent (though not perfect) motion handling. It is an amazing very natural PQ that I enjoy watching for films in a darkened environment and an LG does not even come close for this use case particular because of the "pop" of oversaturated colors providing an unnatural film like viewing experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,696 Posts
LOL. Maybe you missed the part where I mention that I was using cinemapro settings on the Sony A8G and the follow on where I mention out of the box PQ. I would agree that the PQ would be closer between LG and Sony if both were calibrated but for film would still give the nod to Sony and for games give the nod to the LG.

I am ISF Level II certified and calibrated my own TVs in the past. I agree that my Sony A8G OOB PQ is not as accurate as if it were calibrated.

Joel Silver would likely go ape if read or heard me say the following but I actually prefer the Sony OOB cinemapro settings to a more accurate ISF calibration. Yes, I believe Sony intentionally provides a PQ that is very natural and film like in the default cinemapro settings even though it technically is not as accurate. I do not see any dithering with excellent shadow detail and black levels and excellent (though not perfect) motion handling. It is an amazing PQ that I enjoy watching for films in a darkened environment and is an LG does not even come close for this use case.

That’s fair, maybe the a9g is an anomaly as far as Sony’s go . I agree the movie experience is exceptional but the overall performance I found lacking . I think brands have strengths that vary by model year , I had an A8F that i really enjoyed a few years back . Not anti Sony by any means , LG really stepped up their game this year with the CX to be fair I probably shouldn’t judge the A8G because I have never owned it . I was told by a calibrator that the A9G was intentionally designed the be more saturated than previous Sony’s and that matches my experience and was the primary reason I returned it for the LG . At least we agree Oleds are the best replacement for plasma .


77CX YTTV AppleTv 4K Sony X800M2 Yamaha V685
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Since this is a versus thread, ill also bring up my opinion on sony v panasonic. Last year i spent an hour comparing the a9g and gz2000 next to each other in a dedicated room using my own content. Overall, I came away with the impression that motion is the "only" area where the sony had an edge over the panasonic. In all other areas, either the panasonic was about equal to the sony, or panasonic had an edge over sony. I really find it hard to put a finger on anything that an a9g does better than the gz2000 other than motion. Dark scene performance in sdr/hdr goes to panasonic (no flashing artifacts like a9g and better shadow detail in some scenes in areas where the sony 'gulped' the detail and just showed a patch of black), color accuracy panasonic (professional reviews also say that panasonic's pro1 mode is still the best among all brands for OOTB color accuracy in sdr), brightness (APL) panasonic, highlights on HDR10 content looked excellent on both tv's, DV in general has a little more impact on panasonic (and i used sony DV bright to compare, i have never bothered with using DV dark on sony with a bumped up gamma in the picture settings). Upscaling was very similar on both tv's using hd content (720p and higher). Smart tv functionality on both the tv's is mediocre/ 'gets the job done' type (webOS and tizen are better). AR Filter i did not compare watching in a dark room but i have been told the AR filter performs just the same on both tv's. Uniformity (of the two retail units i got to compare)- both tv's on 100% white had minor pink-ish tinting on the top left corner, low end unformity was definitely better on panasonic, cleaner 5% and 2% than sony. Physical appearance/aesthetics , i dont have a favorite, both looked fine with a solid build (but not as pretty looking as a W series LG wallpaper oled).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
^^
Did the GZ2000 have the Panasonic micro-stutter or was it fixed?
A strange thing i have noticed with panasonic's micro stutter and frame skipping problems following owners threads of the tv's, is that it seems to be panel specific, some people say their tv has it, others say they have never seen it on their tv. On the retail unit i demoed, i did not see any micro stutter in all the content i demoed. The reason though i give an edge to sony in motion is because of smoothness and little to no motion artifacts, especially the camera pans look smoother on sony. This is with or without motion processing engaged on both the tv's. With panasonic, in a few scenes I found that engaging IFC made the slow camera pans actually look worse than with IFC off. Most professional reviews I've seen recommend to keep IFC off.
 
101 - 120 of 367 Posts
Top