OLED vs. QLED; LG vs. Samsung— Comments please
 

A quick time sensitive survey:

I am putting in a TV in a new listening room. Off-axis viewing not really an issue. During the day, the wall behind the viewer can be fairly bright (French doors with shutters). Viewing distance about 8.5 feet.

Choices:

LG C9 or CX (OLED) 65” or Samsung 80R (2019 model with One Connect box and not the reduced features in the 2020 model) (QLED) 65”?

Unfortunately (actually, fortunately), Sony got knocked out of the running when I caught me the LuFlu from which I emerged pretty much unscathed except for my budget and also left me with the lasting side effect of a new Quadraspire rack.

Thanks in advance for the advice and comments.

Happy Independence Day! Live free and listen to great music!

In case anyone with an opinion is concerned, OLED vs. QLED is not political question. Now, LG vs. Samsung? Some might consider that to be a political question. We may need to check with the administrator on that one.

Careful... ;)

https://hightechforum.org/wp-content...of-Justice.jpg

OLED vs. QLED; LG vs. Samsung— Comments please
 

OLED is an emissive technology so can be turned down to zero output and anything in between. QLED is marketing speak for LED - the same LED LCD technology that’s been around for awhile.

“But we’d really like you to think it is OLED” this the name similarity. And we use quantum dots! Whatever that does.

As a transmissive technology, QLED will not have the contrast ratio or turn down capability of OLED.

In very bright environments a QLED or for that matter any LED LCD TV will probably outperform an OLED. For deep and accurate blacks that most movies require, OLED is the ticket. The pic is a lot like a plasma tv.

Luck Gold Star and Three Stars are equivalent Chaebol’s.

I purchased a 77” LG OLED about three months ago. It’s been a terrific TV. Based on my in-store comparison, both my wife and I preferred LG although it was close.

Which LG?

The CX

I've been extremely satisfied with my 65" LG OLED that I purchased 3 years ago. Especially after adding an Apple TV+ 4K and they sync up with DolbyVision. Outstanding. :thumbsup:

Thanks for the advice. I’ve have a new 65” OLED- LG CX- on the way.

We bought our 65" OLED LG TV about 6 months ago and couldn't be happier with it. I would absolutely do it all over again in a heartbeat.

It looks like I am in the minority here so far but I purchased a 75" Samsung Q80R and am very happy with that choice.

Inky blacks, in Movie mode the screen really pops, no reflections suffered due to the matte finish of the screen material - which does not mask the picture - and a great package of picture controls and settings which allows for super fine tweaking to your liking.

The picture is clean and crisp all the way to the sides and corners.

Good luck with your choice!

I have the Sony FALD flagship from a few years back ZD9 and the LG C7 of similar vintage.

The C7 is just better in most aspects of video quality. No halo and the ZD9 already had some of the largest discrete number of dimmable zones even compared to today.

The Sony did have better motion but that’s a Sony trait. And the Sony was brighter 1800nits vs 850 on the LG but in use it wasn’t as noticeable in most shows.

LG Display is the supplier for SONY. https://www.theverge.com/ces/2017/1/...splay-ces-2017

The ZD9 is an FALD not an OLED. The Sony OLED is sourced from LG (same as with Panasonic, Loewe, Philips etc). But even then there are some differences between different makes. The Panasonic 2000 series for instance was best in class - higher brightness and higher ABL because of tweaks that Panasonic made. Sony traditionally has better motion processing.

Samsung will be selling OLEDs. That should answer the question.
https://www.cnet.com/news/how-samsun...-tv-supremacy/

We have chosen Samsung, QLED, and been very happy. One feature that I found very convenient is the "box" if you cannot hide wiring inside a wall. All connections are done at the box easily hidden in your cabinet, there are only a thin fiberoptic and power cord going to the TV.

OLED vs. QLED; LG vs. Samsung— Comments please
 

Not trying to be pedantic - it is Samsung Display that is moving to Quantum Dot filter OLED

BUT Samsung Electronics which manufactures and sells the TVs themselves haven’t gone to the new tech. The rumor mill says it’s because the QD OLED is limited to 4K at the moment so it doesn’t fit the marketing angle that Samsung Electronics have been pushing for the last 2 years - 8K. So it seems Samsung Electronics will now source Chinese built 8K LCD panels. And Samsung Displays will be selling QD OLED to Chinese vendors. [emoji2357]

I would love to see the new QD OLED stuff.

It uses blue OLED panels and quantum dot filters to recreate red and green (vs a second yellow OLED with filters). Using a single OLED apparently will result in lower costs and better screen uniformity. While the QD filter should give closer to REC2020 color space than before.

Great info - thanks. Do you know if Samsung Electronics or another OLED panel supplier is going to produce smaller form factor panels? I’d like to see something in the 42” size for our living room, which has a specific fixed width space.

Yeah... About that 8K hype https://www.cnet.com/news/8k-tv-what-you-need-to-know/

I liked this quote from the article:

“Without 8K content, an 8K TV is just a 4K TV with a few thousand dollars stuck to it with duct tape.”

Then again I remember similar things being said about UHD, and man is it spectacular in my theater compared to 1080p. For some titles, not all.

Not sure of the process. OLED now goes to 48”. I understand no of panels of those sizes are small because they cut 48 and 77 panels from the same large OLED panel - to improve the best use of the entire panel. But they usually use the same area to cut more 65 panels.

Maybe if they did an 80 or 88” we might have smaller than 48 panels. Can’t imagine the demand is high for that. Australia distributors for OLEDs won’t even import the 48” panel initially.

I’m a big fan of emissive panels which is why I like OLED. It looks like there will be a wait for them to trickle down to smaller sizes. Thanks.

All I can say is I am very happy with my 4K OLED but I really do miss the 1080P Plasma Kuro Elite... Can't appreciate the difference in resolution from over 10ft distance but that plasma was way superior to most of the stuff out there today IMHO. It did always raise the room temperature by a few degrees though :D

PHC1, interesting. I’m still using a Pioneer Elite Kuro but was thinking about an LG OLED. Are you saying the Kuro for as far back as it goes is still better?

Since you still have it, you can easily compare with the same source to see if an OLED can outdo your Kuro... At normal viewing distances and beyond, the extra resolution is hardly a bonus since the biomechanics of our eyes do not allow us to appreciate it. One has to sit really close and compare to appreciate the difference of 4K with 4K source.

The other characteristics of the Kuro however were superior IMHO. The picture was more "cinematic" and "film" like depending on the source of course. It is however quite possible that spec wise the blacks and contrast may even be better on OLED. I often feel that cinematic quality has been lost and everything looks like high resolution soap opera quality instead of Hollywood cinema. Could also be Hollywood is to blame :D

I'm going by memory since it has been a few years but I recall being blown away by that Plasma each and every time I watched a good source but it may also be personal preference and what looks better to my eyes. Easy enough to compare for yourself. :yes:

While on the topic of picture quality, the switch from celluloid to digital in Hollywood is an interesting topic. CGI is the future for all Sci-Fi to create scenes and stunts that would be impossible to achieve but what about other genres of film? Digital has taken over Hollywood as well. :tears:

https://stephenfollows.com/wp-conten...-2-900x513.png

As the chart below shows, digital formats had overt
taken film by 2013. Five years later, there is no competition. Of movies released in 2018, 91% used a digital format and just 14% used film.

https://stephenfollows.com/wp-conten...-2-900x513.png

Hey Serge - just curious why the tears?

With Red’s latest sensors going native 17 stops without HDRx and another several stops with it, performance is now better than the best film stocks in every measurable way.

Tom
I certainly understand all the advantages of digital in terms of technical aspects, as well as ease of handling, editing, etc... But to my eyes digital cinema is not much different than what the transition was from film to digital in photography. Movies are often missing that cinematic film quality which I’m afraid we may never get back.

While I’ve enjoyed watching some 4K content of nature, in high definition and eye popping color, I’m much less impressed with every visible pore and every tiny skin defect on the actors faces... I feel its unnecessary and the lack of smoothness and over the top sharpness is often irritating to me.

I guess I’m old school when it comes to still and moving images, I prefer softer focus and smoothness, often a more traditional movie effects of shallow depth of field to sharpness and soap opera like homogeneity of image with little creativity.

It all may be a moot point anyways as computer graphics will be the bulk of created scenes anyways and I’m sure the manipulation of such advanced graphics can yield any desired effect the director wants. We are living in an ever increasing digital and virtual age with less human contact, interaction and ultimately even need for Hollywood actors. I’m sure the day will come when digitally rendered heroes will replace any and all actors. I don’t think the generations growing up on anime and VR will ever miss the human actors. :no:

The experts can put into words much better than I can...

“If I can't shoot on film I'll stop making movies," Tarantino said on Los Angeles radio station”


https://www.vox.com/2016/1/5/1071458...70mm-explainer

Very much reminds me of the debate of “analog vs digital” among the audiophiles and both camps have their valid points. The Hollywood “digital vs film” debate also has valid points with both camps. Here is a good video on the topic with the focus on the message the media itself can impart.

The film qualities or shortcomings transcend the technical and become the romantic, nostalgic, familiar or perhaps even connect on the more subconscious level than we realize. Can digital achieve the same?

https://youtu.be/jv7y7TbHlQM

:scratch2:

I like the whole Tarantino quote:

"If I can't shoot on film I'll stop making movies," ........He added, "If we're acquiescing to digital projection, we've already ceded too much ground to the barbarians. The fight is lost if all we have is digital, DCP presentations. To me, that's just television in public."

And in the Vox article you could replace “film” with “vinyl” and create the audio analog to the film vs digital video debate.

Turning back around to the main topic of the thread, I have never seen an LCD TV from any manufacturer with a picture I liked.

Whereas I really like CRT, OLED and plasma displays.

The raw performance of the medium does not tell the whole story.

The worst culprit that Tarantino describes must be the new 60/120fps format for movies.

I was watching Gemini Man in UHD60 and OMG it was terrible.

I had watched the FullHD24 version previously and was drawn in to the movie’s special effects.

With 60fps, you could tell the explosion was just a smoke bomb. [emoji2357]you could also see the deliberate choreography of when the actor moved to position. These don’t appear that obvious when you watched in 24fps.

Impressive detail up close though.

For sure part of the cinema experience is based on the 24 FPS flicker.

I’m in the market for an Oled/Qled TV. Is the LG CX the preferred TV? Any issues with burn in?

Absolutely...........after years of being a loyal Sony user I decided to purchase a LG OLED 55C6P a few years ago. Burn-in is pretty bad if you use as an everyday TV. News Banner on bottom, center people ghosting, and 4:3 shadow. My neighbor also has the same TV with even worse burn-in. Mostly in the Red color channel.

I love the TV quality but not a happy camper...........:icon_thumbsdown:

Ron

I have the LG OLED 65C7V now for a few years, no burn in issues at all, great picture quality.

I have an LG 77CX and have no problem with burn-in. The CX models came out in late 2019. The C6 is a 2016 model, C7 is a 2017, and so forth. CX is the 2020 model.

Real Life OLED Burn-In Test on 6 TVs
Updated Nov 15, 2019 at 03:41 pm
By Daniel O'Keeffe

OLED TVs have great picture quality, however, there are concerns about their long-term performance due to the possibility of permanent image retention, commonly referred to as burn-in.

Our previous 20 hours per day burn-in test is still running and the OLED TV already has permanent retention. That test is an extreme case, using patterns with a lot of static content.

Based on your feedback and comments, we have bought 6 LG OLED C7 which will play real, non-altered content. This should give you a better idea on what to expect depending on what you watch on your TV.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/real...d-burn-in-test


Ron

My TV is on most of the day when I'm at work..............for my dogs enjoyment, and have 16,218 hours on it. News channels are frequently on as some 4:3 content.

I believe this burn-in issue is dependant on the watched content and for how long. I personally don't want a TV I have to baby though.