Mintmaster
Veteran
Eeewwwww, rear-projection LCD.geo said:
Sony Tops LCD TV Market
- Thread starter Deepak
- Start date
Hardknock said:
Samsung makes cheap LCD tv's, not "best" LCD tv's. Trust me i have one.
I'd put Panasonic way above Samsung, and Toshiba too, which always provides the best connections at a cheap price... And let's not forget Hitachi. Lots of companies make better sets than Samsung, and i say that as a Samsung customer.
london-boy said:
What you say is true london-boy, that Samsung are not a "best" brand, but I have a friend with a top of the range 40" Bravia Sony LCD and he is not happy with it as certain media played on it looks really bad. Yes I am talking about DivX stuff here that he encodes at high bitrates himself. He is comparing it to his aging 36" CRT set, but is disappointed that you need very high quality material being fed into it for the screen to really shine.
Of course he says that when HD material is here the screen will be able to stretch its pixels.. but realistically for most people that is still a year or more off.
For that main reason I have shied away from LCD TV screens.
randycat99
Veteran
Just a troubleshooting point for your friend- ask him if he has tried to play the original, uncompressed content (assuming this divx stuff came from his own digital movie stock/home movies) on his Bravia (as in the camera in playback mode streaming directly to the TV). Does it still look bad? Hopefully there is a digital output option when connecting the digicam, because if the TV has to convert it from an analog signal, then that would be an extra complication to effect the resulting video.
The only update I have is that blacks have green patches in them, but this is not picked up on his CRT. Possibly poor encoding at fault but the main point is that without good material LCD screens look bad. I will speak to him and see if I can get more information.
As to where the original material came from - I didn't enquire..
As to where the original material came from - I didn't enquire..
randycat99
Veteran
This could lead to an interesting result. Please keep us posted!
Tahir2 said:The only update I have is that blacks have green patches in them, but this is not picked up on his CRT. Possibly poor encoding at fault but the main point is that without good material LCD screens look bad. I will speak to him and see if I can get more information.
As to where the original material came from - I didn't enquire..
I understand, the "green ghost" of compressed DivX can be quite annoying, but for some reason, after a bit of tweaking, my TV doesn't suffer from that anymore. It all depends on the brightness and contrast settings on the TV.
I can testify that some DivX files do have horrible compression artifacts, and an LCD screen will usually amplify them if it's not tweaked properly, but all in all, todday the picture i get from my LCD is the best i've seen in people's homes, be it CRT or Plasma or anything else. I do try to always feed it nice things, my DVD player for example is an upscaling HDMI one and it shows...
My experience on LCD screens (computer displays, but I think LCD TV is the same) is that they have fewer colors so the compression artifacts are amplified. Furthermore, LCD have more detail than most CRT, so it's easier to see.
I once played a Real Media file on my CRT TV, which looks OK (it's an internet streaming video, low bitrate), but it looks terrible on my low-end 15" LCD. I think it's probably the same "problem" with LCD TV.
I once played a Real Media file on my CRT TV, which looks OK (it's an internet streaming video, low bitrate), but it looks terrible on my low-end 15" LCD. I think it's probably the same "problem" with LCD TV.
What i found strange is that i see "green" where "black" should be on certain DVD players even on CRT, and never on my LCD... Which leads me to believe it's the source that's the prolem (either badly compressed or just a crap DVD player), not the display.
The LCD will only show the flaws a bit more, but that's just because it can show a lot more detail than old CRT. Still, with a good source, it looks great.
The LCD will only show the flaws a bit more, but that's just because it can show a lot more detail than old CRT. Still, with a good source, it looks great.
randycat99
Veteran
Hasn't "green" been historically the most troublesome color to reproduce on CRT's and LCD's alike? The rendering suffers at its extremes, and likely finess in steps in between, as well. It may also be the color of greatest sensitivity for the human eye (whereas blue is typically the color of least sensitivity). So if there are residuals and artifacts in this color range, the eye will pick it up quite readily. ...or it could just be the particular TV has a calibration error where the green is getting some extra push at the low gray levels.
MuFu said:
Yep, i might just sell my R51 to my best mate for 600 quid (totally ripping him off but hey, he's loaded and clueless!) and get a new one!!
Just made the dreaded trip to Currys to check out some LCDs and get dribbled on by the absolute spacktards that set them up (badly).
The standout performer was a 32" Sony V series (old one). They had neither the new S nor the new V in store, but if the former is as good as the set we saw (supposedly it's even better) then Sony have another winner - absolutely suberb in every respect.
They had a Samsung R73 and R51 side by side there as well. Unfortunately their freeview tuners seemed to really struggle with the signal they were getting and they were the only sets which were dropping the stream repeatedly. IQ-wise, the R7x wasn't the improvement over the R5x that I was expecting, though it was hard to tell because (with identical menu settings) the former provided very pink-biased skin tones, while the latter tended towards orange. They made each other look a bit silly to be honest, though the quality of the panels was evident - I suspect they'd come closer to the Sony with HD video.
Aesthetically, the R73 is absolutely hideous. It looks great in brochures but when you see it up close the uneven gloss black surface lets it down - it just seems tacky. I much prefer the more faceted older models.
Got to say, the most distinguishing factor in-store was the way the sets coped with a standard definition feed. The few LCDs that were hooked up to HD sources were more tricky to compare. The LGs looked good for the money, but again, the Sony won out due to deeper blacks and far more useful processing - LG's "XD" seemed less intelligent, by default raising the saturation and contrast to silly levels. There was a Panasonic unit there which looked quite good, but I didn't have time to investigate. Shame there were no Toshibas.
The standout performer was a 32" Sony V series (old one). They had neither the new S nor the new V in store, but if the former is as good as the set we saw (supposedly it's even better) then Sony have another winner - absolutely suberb in every respect.
They had a Samsung R73 and R51 side by side there as well. Unfortunately their freeview tuners seemed to really struggle with the signal they were getting and they were the only sets which were dropping the stream repeatedly. IQ-wise, the R7x wasn't the improvement over the R5x that I was expecting, though it was hard to tell because (with identical menu settings) the former provided very pink-biased skin tones, while the latter tended towards orange. They made each other look a bit silly to be honest, though the quality of the panels was evident - I suspect they'd come closer to the Sony with HD video.
Aesthetically, the R73 is absolutely hideous. It looks great in brochures but when you see it up close the uneven gloss black surface lets it down - it just seems tacky. I much prefer the more faceted older models.
Got to say, the most distinguishing factor in-store was the way the sets coped with a standard definition feed. The few LCDs that were hooked up to HD sources were more tricky to compare. The LGs looked good for the money, but again, the Sony won out due to deeper blacks and far more useful processing - LG's "XD" seemed less intelligent, by default raising the saturation and contrast to silly levels. There was a Panasonic unit there which looked quite good, but I didn't have time to investigate. Shame there were no Toshibas.
Last edited by a moderator:
NANOTEC said:
They have a pretty good reputation, but their relatively new P-series isn't HD-ready (res is 960 x 540) which obviously doesn't do them any favours on the "checkbox feature" list. IIRC, they also have pretty crappy PC compatibility - VGA res limitation on the DB15 port.
MuFu said:
Hey you copied some guy's post on the avforums! And you're using his username too!!!
lol. Yeah - have to be bit careful when you post in a bandwagon thread like that. AVF is ok though.
Good to know the reception problem probably isn't a Samsung "feature". It was odd - pretty sure a Samsung rep would have something to say about the way their TVs are being presented in the Aylesbury branch of Currys.
Good to know the reception problem probably isn't a Samsung "feature". It was odd - pretty sure a Samsung rep would have something to say about the way their TVs are being presented in the Aylesbury branch of Currys.
