Do you still run a plasma ?

[Griffith4ever]

TEKNOPUG said:

Griffith4ever said:

jsf said:

There are different specs of LG panels and processors.

You can get a last year C1 55" unit for your budget, the current year C2 55" is about £1400, the C2 has a faster processor and a brighter display and seems to get very good reviews for that budget range.

I often read this. The processor speed. The brightness.

I bought a B series LG OLED when the C series was out, at a saving of course. Lots of people were discouraged from getting the B series bargain on here and elsewhere due to "faster processor". But at the end of the day, why?

On my LG I turn off ALL image processing. All it is is a monitor. I've never once thought "hmm the processor seems sluggish". I've never thought about the processor at all tbh. It's a telly.

As for the brightness. HDR can actually hurt.

The picture is stunning. Not wanting for anything. And I'm picky.

I'm not mocking the desire to have the latest spec, but I have no doubt the "latest gen processor" thing is pretty much all people like LG have left to promote and sell new ranges. I'd put good money on people failing to identify different processor models in a blind test with picture ruining features like motion smoothing turned off.

I think that there may be some confusion over how TVs work, what a processor does and how TVs can differ in performance (and the image is not the only consideration).

It's like saying all British sports cars are the same because they all have Rover V8 engines....

I'm not so sure. The image IS the only consideration on a TV for me. I know image processing handles the entire decoding and picture, but, again, I have to ask, how does a faster processor improve what is already superb? It's snake oil to sell new models. You can get a good hint of this when you see they promote all the image processing "features" with each new model. "smooth AI", "dynamic image" etc. All the stuff you want to turn off btw.

I'd still challenge anyone to a blind test comparison

Edited by Griffith4ever on Tuesday 20th September 09:35

[legzr1]

Griffith4ever said:

I'd still challenge anyone to a blind test comparison

Edited by Griffith4ever on Tuesday 20th September 09:35

That could prove problematic…

[TEKNOPUG]

Griffith4ever said:

TEKNOPUG said:

Griffith4ever said:

jsf said:

There are different specs of LG panels and processors.

You can get a last year C1 55" unit for your budget, the current year C2 55" is about £1400, the C2 has a faster processor and a brighter display and seems to get very good reviews for that budget range.

I often read this. The processor speed. The brightness.

I bought a B series LG OLED when the C series was out, at a saving of course. Lots of people were discouraged from getting the B series bargain on here and elsewhere due to "faster processor". But at the end of the day, why?

On my LG I turn off ALL image processing. All it is is a monitor. I've never once thought "hmm the processor seems sluggish". I've never thought about the processor at all tbh. It's a telly.

As for the brightness. HDR can actually hurt.

The picture is stunning. Not wanting for anything. And I'm picky.

I'm not mocking the desire to have the latest spec, but I have no doubt the "latest gen processor" thing is pretty much all people like LG have left to promote and sell new ranges. I'd put good money on people failing to identify different processor models in a blind test with picture ruining features like motion smoothing turned off.

I think that there may be some confusion over how TVs work, what a processor does and how TVs can differ in performance (and the image is not the only consideration).

It's like saying all British sports cars are the same because they all have Rover V8 engines....

I'm not so sure. The image IS the only consideration on a TV for me. I know image processing handles the entire decoding and picture, but, again, I have to ask, how does a faster processor improve what is already superb? It's snake oil to sell new models. You can get a good hint of this when you see they promote all the image processing "features" with each new model. "smooth AI", "dynamic image" etc. All the stuff you want to turn off btw.

I'd still challenge anyone to a blind test comparison

Edited by Griffith4ever on Tuesday 20th September 09:35

The thing is, unlike say analogue audio, everything on a TV can and is measured. Brightness, contrast, colour saturation, colour pallete, frame motion, input lag etc can all be measured from one TV to another. So it's very easy to determine that one model is superior to another in certain aspects. Or how one year's series is superior to a prior year. It's not just the image that the processor controls, it's also the connectivity, audio formats, OS (Android, Google, proprietary), appsetc continually evolve.

Presumably your B series LG replaced a previous TV, so you believed it was possible to improve on what you already had? It seems a little churlish to suggest that you alone have determined what the peak of TV production is (even though it can be proved otherwise) and everyone else is a fool to buy a newer model. It's also easy to state that you couldn't imagine how any TV could be better than yours which you consider superb, it you haven't experienced the newer TVs. I'm sure owners' of Pioneer Kuros and Panny VTs back in the day all thought that they had the pinnacle in viewing quality.

Samsung and Sony for example are now releasing QD OLED screens, which are fundamentally superior to OLED screens and will more than likely replace OLED as the premier screen type in the future. Another thing to consider is the whilst some commercial TVs can cost >£5k+, a broadcast reference quality monitor is >£30k+. So there is a huge gap in what is actually possible versus what is available to the public.

Whether one can tell a difference in a blind test is a different matter and depends on many factors, not least the source and ambient lighting but also any settings and calibration of the screen and indeed the screen itself (given the quantity of screens manufactured, there can be visible differences on exactly the same models). And obviously your own eye sight I expect that most people couldn't tell the difference in a 4K source on any OLED TV made in the last 3 years (if all calibrated correctly). Although I also, expect most people couldn't tell the difference between 128kpbs v 320kpbs v Hi-Res audio......but it doesn't mean that there isn't a measurable difference.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

legzr1 said:

That could prove problematic…

[Griffith4ever]

TEKNOPUG said:

It seems a little churlish to suggest that you alone have determined what the peak of TV production is (even though it can be proved otherwise) and everyone else is a fool to buy a newer model.

Neither of those things I said, but, that is a good example why people don't like it when you point out that TV models are "refreshed" most years simply to stimulate sales. Of course there are improvements over time, but, as I said (as a reminder, as you seem to have wandered off all over the place and ended up with QD OLEDs), don't base your buying decision on "processor speed".

[Griffith4ever]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

legzr1 said:

That could prove problematic…

I did think about using another phrase, but where is the fun in that :-)

[Chris Stott]

I watch TV on 3 different generations of LG OLED fairly regularly... I have a 2021 55" C1 and my brother-in-law has a 2018 55" and 2019 65".

Obviously can't watch them side by side, and they are also in different viewing environments - mine's in a super bright living room, for example. However, I can honestly say I've never looked at any one of them and thought the picture was anything other than fabulous, whatever the tiny differences in processing power or claimed brightness/contrast levels.

The OS is better in my newer model though... more responsive.

If you're coming from a 10-15 year old plasma, any model of OLED will have a significantly better picture.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

Chris Stott said:

If you're coming from a 10-15 year old plasma, any model of OLED will have a significantly better picture.

Ah, well there we get into muddy waters as "better" is a very subjective term.

This is a genuine question, but does an OLED match the warmth and almost analogue feel of plasma? And does it cope as well with SD feeds as plasma does? Because these are real concerns for me.

Also, when I see LCD and OLED screens in shops (eg. Costco) they always seem too crisp, too "live", too sharp, to the point that it almost induces vertigo. Everything looks artificial and lacking in fluidity. Even normal telly programmes

I presume this can be toned down for normal viewing and that these tellies have all been set to some sort of demo mode?

[Chris Stott]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Ah, well there we get into muddy waters as "better" is a very subjective term.

This is a genuine question, but does an OLED match the warmth and almost analogue feel of plasma? And does it cope as well with SD feeds as plasma does? Because these are real concerns for me.

Also, when I see LCD and OLED screens in shops (eg. Costco) they always seem too crisp, too "live", too sharp, to the point that it almost induces vertigo. Everything looks artificial and lacking in fluidity. Even normal telly programmes

I presume this can be toned down for normal viewing and that these tellies have all been set to some sort of demo mode?

I just tried Sky Sports SD channel for the hell of it and it looks OK compared to the HD channel, but why would anyone choose to watch SD... Are any broadcast channels not available in HD now?

'Warmth', 'analogue'... what do these mean in relation to a TV picture? Do you mean like watching TV without your glasses on... slightly dull and hazy?

Forget what any TV looks like in a shop as, a) it's not a representative viewing environment (super bright, florescent lighting), b) the display models have everything turned up to the max & c) most OLED displays will be running specific 4k/HDR source material. TV's have a myriad of settings to enable you to get the picture to look good in your home... if you want a 'warm' colour balance, that option is there for you. If you want a duller picture, turn the brightness down a bit, or reduce the contrast a fraction.

[number2]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Chris Stott said:

If you're coming from a 10-15 year old plasma, any model of OLED will have a significantly better picture.

Ah, well there we get into muddy waters as "better" is a very subjective term.

This is a genuine question, but does an OLED match the warmth and almost analogue feel of plasma? And does it cope as well with SD feeds as plasma does? Because these are real concerns for me.

Also, when I see LCD and OLED screens in shops (eg. Costco) they always seem too crisp, too "live", too sharp, to the point that it almost induces vertigo. Everything looks artificial and lacking in fluidity. Even normal telly programmes

I presume this can be toned down for normal viewing and that these tellies have all been set to some sort of demo mode?

Copes at least as well with SD.
Shop settings are deliberately garish and are not reflective of a more natural setting you might like to use at home.

I have what was a top of the range plasma, and similarly a range topping OLED. The OLED is 4k rather than 1080 like the plasma, but there are no circumstances in which I would choose the plasma over the OLED.

[TEKNOPUG]

Griffith4ever said:

TEKNOPUG said:

It seems a little churlish to suggest that you alone have determined what the peak of TV production is (even though it can be proved otherwise) and everyone else is a fool to buy a newer model.

Neither of those things I said, but, that is a good example why people don't like it when you point out that TV models are "refreshed" most years simply to stimulate sales. Of course there are improvements over time, but, as I said (as a reminder, as you seem to have wandered off all over the place and ended up with QD OLEDs), don't base your buying decision on "processor speed".

As you say, all OLED screens are made by LG and therefore all OLED TVs have the same panel (there are a range of panels). So the difference between brands and models is the processor that is used and how they are programmed (and other factors such as incorporating heatsinks to allow screen to run brighter). The reason that a 2022 TV is capable of performing better than a 2020 is precisely because either has a more powerful processor or more advanced software driving the panel. A faster processor will also show itself, for example, in how smooth and quick the GUI and apps respond to user inputs and also advanced audio & video inputs.

So even if you don't base your buying decision on "processor speed", the reason that you will prefer the performance of one OLED model over another, will almost certainly be because there is a difference in the processors. The LG A2 & B2 models, for example, both use an A7 processor, whereas the C2 & G2 use a newer and more powerful A9 processor. That's why they produce a better picture than the A&B models.

Edited by TEKNOPUG on Tuesday 20th September 15:45

[Greenmantle]

Been looking at replacing my ancient panasonic plasma with a panasonic oled.
Just a funny time at the moment since don't really want to buy new and the L version isn't freely available yet.
Will just have to wait.

[blueg33]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

blueg33 said:

High end Panasonic CRT for me bought probably 20 years ago for £2k which was a lot. People still comment on how good the picture is.

I remember back in the early 90's a friend had an absolutely enormous CRT telly and he had actually cut a hole in the wall so the arse-end of it could intrude into an adjacent room making it look almost flat screen.

Ours isnt that big.

The down side is that we cant easily plug in modern devices. My surround sound system uses component video and the TV has 6 SCART sockets, but HDMI to SCART is not great and since amazon updated firestick software, the fire stick doesn't work at all through an adaptor

[Clockwork Cupcake]

blueg33 said:

Ours isnt that big.

His was though. Absolutely enormous telly in a small house. The arse end of the telly took up half the adjacent room. It was all rather odd.

I can't remember if it was the biggest CRT telly I had ever seen or a back projection TV, but either way it was as deep as it was wide.

I was a student on my placement year and he was a full time permanent employee, but he was only a couple of years older than me and yet had a wife and kid.

[PhilboSE]

I have a 55" Panasonic plasma - the last model they ever released, regarded as the best plasma ever as the Kuro IP was integrated.

I also have a 65" LG C series OLED 2021 model.

On the same SD and HD sources, the OLED is better IMO. Both are stunning pictures, but the OLED edges it. On a "modern" 4K/HDR source, it is obviously a step up again.

[anonymous-user]

The largest CRT TV was 43" display diagonal. Weighed about 200Kg.

[anonymous-user]

PhilboSE said:

I have a 55" Panasonic plasma - the last model they ever released, regarded as the best plasma ever as the Kuro IP was integrated.

I also have a 65" LG C series OLED 2021 model.

On the same SD and HD sources, the OLED is better IMO. Both are stunning pictures, but the OLED edges it. On a "modern" 4K/HDR source, it is obviously a step up again.

I’ve got the P50VT50B, which I guess is the 50” version of your 55” screen.

One of the things I don’t like about 4K and a lot of modern screens is that when you put them in a room, the image is sharper and more clearly defined than anything else in the room. Unnaturally so, to my eyes. I really like the “lifelike-ness” of the plasma.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

BlackWidow13 said:

One of the things I don’t like about 4K and a lot of modern screens is that when you put them in a room, the image is sharper and more clearly defined than anything else in the room. Unnaturally so, to my eyes. I really like the “lifelike-ness” of the plasma.

Exactly what I was trying to say.

[anonymous-user]

jsf said:

There are different specs of LG panels and processors.

You can get a last year C1 55" unit for your budget, the current year C2 55" is about £1400, the C2 has a faster processor and a brighter display and seems to get very good reviews for that budget range.

Just to update this, i have just bought the C2 55" version, it arrives on Saturday (i could have had it tomorrow if i was going to be in). I've had my plasma 37" for 15 years, so i expect this will look massive.

I bought it from AO, it's the same price as everywhere else at £1399, but there is a £100 off code you can apply. Strangely i got the £100 code when i looked using my phone and chrome, using my laptop it only offered £20 off, but even ordering via my laptop and using the code from my phone it worked OK. So some saving there at the moment to be had using AO.com

[anonymous-user]

BlackWidow13 said:

I’ve got the P50VT50B, which I guess is the 50” version of your 55” screen.

One of the things I don’t like about 4K and a lot of modern screens is that when you put them in a room, the image is sharper and more clearly defined than anything else in the room. Unnaturally so, to my eyes. I really like the “lifelike-ness” of the plasma.

We know, you posted the exact same thing on Tuesday.

Are you a bot?