55" OLED or 65" LED TV...
Discussion
davek_964 said:
For the first time, I went and looked at some TVs properly today. Before I went, I was fairly sure I didn't need OLED and wasn't even convinced that I need 4k, since my content will be mostly streamed. Apart from the fact that there is very little 4k available, I understand that streamed 4k is sufficiently compressed that I'll hardly tell the difference anyway.
]
Depends. There is compression and there is compression. Without checking on the codecs in use I can say that BT live rugby for example is superb. I Understand that BT peg the bit rates as well on the service. Netflix also puts out a decent rate. ]
I Aam waiting for a Bluray with the right options or price, the Panasonic is dropping a lot of late so may get that, then I may be able to compare a 1080p however, remember the format is four times 1080i. So 3840/2160 vs 1920/ 1080.
I watch Netflix for my UHD stuff (non sport), not a great deal but a fair bit. A Bluray 1080p is stunning.
When watching a uhd of this make against a HD at the shop, same channel etc. Over the aerial, it was hard to tell them apart.
SD is watchable but you know it is SD.
At the end of the day, it is the MkI eyebal/brain that will see the benefit, or not.
Recently reading that BBC may be trailing over the air uhd.
Went to have a gander at the LG tonight and my local Currys don't have one; the one over by work does though so I'll pop in there tomorrow with some sample files on USB to test with. Got a Love2Shop card burning a hole courtesy of HP this month...!
I'll also get an Xbox One S as a 4k Blu-ray player. The fact it does games is incidental; even as a Blu-ray player it's apparently something of a bargain.
I'll also get an Xbox One S as a 4k Blu-ray player. The fact it does games is incidental; even as a Blu-ray player it's apparently something of a bargain.
Funk said:
Went to have a gander at the LG tonight and my local Currys don't have one; the one over by work does though so I'll pop in there tomorrow with some sample files on USB to test with. Got a Love2Shop card burning a hole courtesy of HP this month...!
I'll also get an Xbox One S as a 4k Blu-ray player. The fact it does games is incidental; even as a Blu-ray player it's apparently something of a bargain.
Only real issue with the Xbox (apart from some HDR issues in software with certain displays) is the use of one HDMI 2.0 port.I'll also get an Xbox One S as a 4k Blu-ray player. The fact it does games is incidental; even as a Blu-ray player it's apparently something of a bargain.
The 'players' use both a 2.0 and 1.4 HDMI allowing video to a display and sound to the thousands of amps/processors able to handle all the latest sound codecs but not HDMI 2.0.
I accept it might not be an issue for some users though.
RobDickinson said:
Thinking of a 55" LG oled..
Heard they can suffer when watching animation? Juddering etc? 'we' watch a lot of studio ghibli etc
Also how are they for SD and iffy compression stuff?
$7000 or so here :O
Can't say I have noticed any.Heard they can suffer when watching animation? Juddering etc? 'we' watch a lot of studio ghibli etc
Also how are they for SD and iffy compression stuff?
$7000 or so here :O
SD is SD, you can see the difference. I find I do not watch any SD channels any more. HD is up scaled very well.
RobDickinson said:
Also how are they for SD and iffy compression stuff?
The screens are really clear and sharp so you see every problem, it's just not worth it. Even most DVD's look shocking, with only very good ones (Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, animated stuff) not suffering from pretty distracting issues. Watched 'The DaVinci Code' the other day on DVD it was horrible, I prefer to watch Red Dwarf on my PC.I can't talk about iffy compression as I have no files that are compressed smaller than the actual DVD/BR originals. However, I have found that since watching BR and 4K BR stuff, the difference in quality from those and DVD is very noticeable. It does upscale DVD's, but to be honest, once I got used to BR and 4K BR, DVD's are now like video cassettes in terms of quality. They are no worse than what we've been used to, it's just that the quality of the other formats makes the DVD versions look worse when compared to HD formats.
DVD's still look fine, especially when played through the 4K BR player, but some DVD's that were fairly poor quality to start with, picture-wise, do not look any better (which is understandable). Some DVD's still look great, and the ones that never looked too good, still look a little crap.
I have been replacing a lot of my favourite movies and box sets from DVD to BR, because they do look and sound so much better (BR disks are now very cheap, some being less than £3, and I have just picked up the complete Battlestar Galactica box set for under £20 in BR format in the Amazon sales)
Regarding The Da Vinci Code, I can confirm that even on a 4K HDR BR disk, the picture still looks grainy, it must be the way it was filmed.
Finally, if you invest in a brand new 4K HDR OLED TV (and possibly a 4K player), why the hell would you want to watch quality stuff that's compressed to an inch if their lives?
DVD's still look fine, especially when played through the 4K BR player, but some DVD's that were fairly poor quality to start with, picture-wise, do not look any better (which is understandable). Some DVD's still look great, and the ones that never looked too good, still look a little crap.
I have been replacing a lot of my favourite movies and box sets from DVD to BR, because they do look and sound so much better (BR disks are now very cheap, some being less than £3, and I have just picked up the complete Battlestar Galactica box set for under £20 in BR format in the Amazon sales)
Regarding The Da Vinci Code, I can confirm that even on a 4K HDR BR disk, the picture still looks grainy, it must be the way it was filmed.
Finally, if you invest in a brand new 4K HDR OLED TV (and possibly a 4K player), why the hell would you want to watch quality stuff that's compressed to an inch if their lives?
If you get a 4k TV and then watch a lot of SD content on it, you are bound to be a little disappointed and you'd be better off buying a really good SD TV!
Up/down scaling is always going to be a compromise.
When flat screen LCD/LED displays started to become popular as computer displays and then TVs, we were watching video on them but it looked really, really bad compared to good old analogue CRT-based monitors, but in order to make progress you have to accept some compromise and if you wait for all the niggles to be sorted out you'd wait forever.
As someone already pointed out, The Da Vinci Code was shot on film stock and grain was part of the look the director wanted to achieve. People need to understand that not all films are designed to resemble video games.
The only aspect of my LG 55B6 which grates from time to time is a bit of posterisation I can see in some compressed source material, mainly some stuff I've been watching via Netflix or Amazon.
Otherwise, it's a massive improvement in every way over my old Sony LED.
Up/down scaling is always going to be a compromise.
When flat screen LCD/LED displays started to become popular as computer displays and then TVs, we were watching video on them but it looked really, really bad compared to good old analogue CRT-based monitors, but in order to make progress you have to accept some compromise and if you wait for all the niggles to be sorted out you'd wait forever.
As someone already pointed out, The Da Vinci Code was shot on film stock and grain was part of the look the director wanted to achieve. People need to understand that not all films are designed to resemble video games.
The only aspect of my LG 55B6 which grates from time to time is a bit of posterisation I can see in some compressed source material, mainly some stuff I've been watching via Netflix or Amazon.
Otherwise, it's a massive improvement in every way over my old Sony LED.
Edited by FurtiveFreddy on Tuesday 22 November 11:56
Common sense says to me that I should buy a 55" TV - the room is only about 12x10 and this seems like it's the "right" size from an aesthetics point of view.
But my non-common sense side is telling me I should buy 65". But I think it will look huuuuuuuge - although, according to ideal viewing distances it will only just scrape in as big enough for my viewing distance of ~8ft for UHD.
There are also some practical considerations - it would be tight fitting between my front speakers. If it fits, great - if not, it would need to be about 12" higher which might be higher than I want for day to day TV - although it would only be the same height as the projector screen I use now.
Plus, 65" TV would mean I could ditch the projector which is very tempting - much as I like it, I'd be willing to sacrifice 72" image for a richer 65" image which doesn't need a totally dark room.
Think I need to do some very careful measuring to see if I can squeeze the 65" where the existing TV is. (And convince myself that I should spend £3k on a TV rather than the £2K I hadn't quite convinced myself to spend yet!).
But my non-common sense side is telling me I should buy 65". But I think it will look huuuuuuuge - although, according to ideal viewing distances it will only just scrape in as big enough for my viewing distance of ~8ft for UHD.
There are also some practical considerations - it would be tight fitting between my front speakers. If it fits, great - if not, it would need to be about 12" higher which might be higher than I want for day to day TV - although it would only be the same height as the projector screen I use now.
Plus, 65" TV would mean I could ditch the projector which is very tempting - much as I like it, I'd be willing to sacrifice 72" image for a richer 65" image which doesn't need a totally dark room.
Think I need to do some very careful measuring to see if I can squeeze the 65" where the existing TV is. (And convince myself that I should spend £3k on a TV rather than the £2K I hadn't quite convinced myself to spend yet!).
davek_964 said:
Common sense says to me that I should buy a 55" TV - the room is only about 12x10 and this seems like it's the "right" size from an aesthetics point of view.
But my non-common sense side is telling me I should buy 65". But I think it will look huuuuuuuge - although, according to ideal viewing distances it will only just scrape in as big enough for my viewing distance of ~8ft for UHD.
There are also some practical considerations - it would be tight fitting between my front speakers. If it fits, great - if not, it would need to be about 12" higher which might be higher than I want for day to day TV - although it would only be the same height as the projector screen I use now.
Plus, 65" TV would mean I could ditch the projector which is very tempting - much as I like it, I'd be willing to sacrifice 72" image for a richer 65" image which doesn't need a totally dark room.
Think I need to do some very careful measuring to see if I can squeeze the 65" where the existing TV is. (And convince myself that I should spend £3k on a TV rather than the £2K I hadn't quite convinced myself to spend yet!).
I've been battling with this dilemma too. IMO if it's wall hung you can get away with larger as the big screen "shrinks" on a wall. If it's on the stand though I would be very careful. But my non-common sense side is telling me I should buy 65". But I think it will look huuuuuuuge - although, according to ideal viewing distances it will only just scrape in as big enough for my viewing distance of ~8ft for UHD.
There are also some practical considerations - it would be tight fitting between my front speakers. If it fits, great - if not, it would need to be about 12" higher which might be higher than I want for day to day TV - although it would only be the same height as the projector screen I use now.
Plus, 65" TV would mean I could ditch the projector which is very tempting - much as I like it, I'd be willing to sacrifice 72" image for a richer 65" image which doesn't need a totally dark room.
Think I need to do some very careful measuring to see if I can squeeze the 65" where the existing TV is. (And convince myself that I should spend £3k on a TV rather than the £2K I hadn't quite convinced myself to spend yet!).
I'm probably going 55" for the above reason but I really want a 65
FurtiveFreddy said:
As someone already pointed out, The Da Vinci Code was shot on film stock and grain was part of the look the director wanted to achieve. People need to understand that not all films are designed to resemble video games.
I was more talking about obvious compression errors, posterisation of dark colours (a lot of the film is shot in the dark) being the most obvious but a general softness of the picture and lack of contrast, even compared to other DVD's, also being obvious. Film grain (which I have no problem with per se) is pretty much a nightmare scenario for video compression and the DVD just can't cope. In this case it probably would have been better if they had DNR's it first.Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff