Why 4K?

Unless you are sitting close enough and/or have a huge screen, the resolution increases have reached diminishing returns and 4K won't offer much benefit over HD. Better to focus on the other aspects of picture quality, in my view. HDR technology and OLED for more contrast perhaps offer better real-world benefits. Hard to go wrong, though. TVs have never been better value.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-u...vs-are-still-stupid/

http://www.cnet.com/news/three...le-than-ultra-hd-4k/

Two things here: Winky's largely correct regarding the diminishing returns when you go 4K. However, at the moment true 4K material's almost impossible to find. The internet sources such as Netflix and Amazon don't really supply the full 4K signal due to bandwidth restrictions. But there's a 4K satellite feed you can view directly (My Samsung's got a satellite input) and the demo material it broadcasts is quite startlingly good.

Another benefit is that the effect of all broadcast pictures being upscaled to 4K gives a worthwhile improvement to even standard definition transmissions.

Yes, you can't really go wrong with the latest generation of TVs from the main manufacturers. I'd originally planned to get an OLED set, but after extensive review I concluded they really weren't any better to my and SWMBO's eyes than the Samsung we eventually bought. All were better than my much-lauded last generation Panasonic plasma.

It'll be interesting to see how things develop. I'll be holding fire on 4K BluRays for a bit.

I largely agree with the preceding comments. It's 4K UHD that brings the biggest improvements, rather than 4K on its own. UHD all about HDR i.e. High Dynamic Range and it can look stunning. On the Panasonic 4K UHD in our guest room the UHD test channel @TONYM mentions does look very good indeed, but it's worth keeping in mind that a lot of it is slow motion.

I was replacing a set that died so I had to buy this year. But I would have preferred to wait a little while longer. I'll certainly do that for the main set.

The UHD Premium standard was only ratified at CES this year so many TVs are not fully compliant. Often this relates to genuine 10-bit panels vs 10-bit processing on 8-bit panels and brightness levels e.g. a minimum of 1000 nits for an LED TV. It's not a great analogy but it's a bit like a 720p TV sold as HD Ready and 1080p TV sold as Full HD a few years back. Also there is the HDR10 vs Dolby Vision debate; they are competing UHD standards. LG and Vizio (A popular US brand) is in the Dolby Vision camp whereas Panasonic and Samsung are in the HDR10 camp. Dolby Vision is more advanced, but it doesn't mean it will win out.

A lot of the discussion on the AVForums podcast has suggested waiting until next year if you can before buying a new TV because there is still quite a bit of flux. If you need to buy this year the suggestion is make sure you get a model with a genuine 10-bit panel, and 1000 nits of brightness. 

@TONYM. If you you don't mind me asking, did you buy a 2016 model year Samsung and is it hooked up to the Internet?

I ask because a friend recently bought one and during the setup was asked if he wanted advertising displayed. I know Samsung got some bad press in the US about this but I didn't think the practice had been extended to Europe.

Hi Greg, the TV's a 2016 model, a JS9500 65". There was nothing regarding adverts when I set it up, & it's connected to the internet.

I just bought a Loewe Art 40" UHD tv. Reason for buying this UHD tv is that my intention is to use it many, many years. Loewe does seem to do upscaling from 1080p to 4K quite well, so I'm safe for now. In about 3 years 4K content will start to be more mainstream and all recent hdmi standards are also on this TV so any new device can be connected to the TV.

I don't like buying 'disposable' stuff therefore I like Loewe and Naim (my kids broke my old technics cd player within a few minutes, my cd5i is still alive... )

staffy posted:

I can afford to buy a new set for around £2500/3000, but why.    OK the major manufacturers are now on their 5/6 generation, so the sets today should be pretty much reliable..

However 4K BR players are only just arriving.  Two models from Panasonic and Samsung are first generation and most 4K movies to buy are really shot in 2K.  Yes you can stream from Netflix, but only if you have fibre optic broadband.

Sky are now on the verge of showing 4K content, but as yet no mention of prices or movie quality.

Would it not be best to wait until Sony and Oppo are on their second generation of 4K players and Sky are awash with 4K content and sport.   AND you can but from Amazon Blade Runner, LOTR Trilogy, Star Wars 1-5 and Gone With The Wind all in 4K.

Just a thought and wish.

 

 

 

I think you just answered your own question...

I'm in no rush as i'm still amazed at the picture quality from my 50" Pioneer Kuro especially when fed with Blu-Ray material. Plan on keeping it for a few more years by which time we should know how the 4K UHD scene has panned out. 

Waiting does not make sense unless you feel you need to save some more money. Reason for that is that the technology push - which is quite unpredictable - will always result in an unbalance in the various components of such a HT system. I mean, once BR 4K has been widely adapted + affordable for the mainstream, the online services could have moved in a complete new era, or the display technologies could have evolved strongly.

My advice, just ensure that the connections are good and upgrade the various components of the system once you feel it's time to do. That's also quite naimish (thanks to the unfulprisen din connections).

I have an LG 32" HD TV that serves for general telly (news, documentaries, casual films etc), when the only time I really notice the HD quality compared to standard is on some documentaries, otherwise yes its sharper, but not something that leaps out unless you flick between the two, and even then with moving images its scarcely noticeable. The bigger the TV the more the difference will be apparent from the same viewing distance, so I guess 4k vs HD on a 50" is likely to be not dissimilar to my HD to standard comparison on 32" - worth it for some things, but not really noticeable for most. However one would expect 4k into come its own with really huge TVs or projection.  But it does depend on viewing distance, and of course the sharpness of the  viewer's eyes at that distance.

In many ways there are parallels to hifi, though the human ears can percieve far more in the way of differences than the eye: If the film is good enough, almost anything is enjoyable provided it is clear enough to follow and doesn't interrupt to buffer etc, just sharper images make it better. I remember a few years ago watching movies in someone's house on a 640x480 projector, projected to about 9ft onto a pale brown wall with two wall light fittings  - but with a good film everyone just got engrossed in it regarless, thoroughly enjoying the sessions. I use an HD projector, displayed on a nominal 160" screen, filled width-wise whatever the format, viewed from about 11 feet away (i.e equivalent to a 50" from 3.5 feet or 32" from 2.2 ft ), so although hugely engaging (literally, given that the angle subtended at the viewer is similar to a big screen cinema) I'm sure that 4K would be noticeably better - but given the dearth of material I have no intention of replacing for many years, by when the prices will have come down further.

When you get to my age, there really isn't any merit in waiting! Technology will charge ahead, and no doubt in a few years' time we'll all be hankering after 8K sets. Thing is, when something new comes along, you just sell what you've got and get the new thing. Life's too short...

I used projectors for many years, all SIM, but they're a bit impractical for everyday use. They don't like to be switched on & off too much & you really need to watch in very subdued light.

rackkit posted:

staffy posted:

I can afford to buy a new set for around £2500/3000, but why.    OK the major manufacturers are now on their 5/6 generation, so the sets today should be pretty much reliable..

However 4K BR players are only just arriving.  Two models from Panasonic and Samsung are first generation and most 4K movies to buy are really shot in 2K.  Yes you can stream from Netflix, but only if you have fibre optic broadband.

Sky are now on the verge of showing 4K content, but as yet no mention of prices or movie quality.

Would it not be best to wait until Sony and Oppo are on their second generation of 4K players and Sky are awash with 4K content and sport.   AND you can but from Amazon Blade Runner, LOTR Trilogy, Star Wars 1-5 and Gone With The Wind all in 4K.

Just a thought and wish.

 

 

 

I think you just answered your own question...

 

 

 

Its not really a question, just my opinion.  I am curious as to what other people think and do regarding  sets and movies to date.

staffy posted:

I can afford to buy a new set for around £2500/3000, but why.    OK the major manufacturers are now on their 5/6 generation, so the sets today should be pretty much reliable..

However 4K BR players are only just arriving.  Two models from Panasonic and Samsung are first generation and most 4K movies to buy are really shot in 2K.  Yes you can stream from Netflix, but only if you have fibre optic broadband.

Sky are now on the verge of showing 4K content, but as yet no mention of prices or movie quality.

Would it not be best to wait until Sony and Oppo are on their second generation of 4K players and Sky are awash with 4K content and sport.   AND you can but from Amazon Blade Runner, LOTR Trilogy, Star Wars 1-5 and Gone With The Wind all in 4K.

Just a thought and wish.

I need a replacement for a 2007 iMac that I have been using for occasional streaming of internet video contents (dch, theoperaplatform, etc.) and I have been considering a 4K tv. But I cannot get myself to buy one. Even if one restricts the choice to the top brands, the range of possibilities is huge. At the same time, getting precise specs for today's tv sets seems nearly impossible: does the optical SPDIF output of the newest Samsung devices support high resolution audio? How good is support for streaming contents from, e.g., 'theoperaplatform.eu'? I really do not want to have a big, black screen permanently set up in my living room to stare at. The devices I came across lately were far too big and often quite hugly: inconsistent mixture of glossy and matt finishing, pretentious design, ugly flatscreen rear sides, etc. Also, I had the impression that the most expensive devices were delivering the most artificial picture quality (e.g., Samsung SUHD, perhaps they had just been setup poorly but then, why so?). The 40'' Samsung Serif looks quite acceptable but is not available in Germany and detailed technical specs or reviews are virtually unavailable. I guess that I will wait for the new iMac 2016.

nbpf posted:

staffy posted:

I can afford to buy a new set for around £2500/3000, but why.    OK the major manufacturers are now on their 5/6 generation, so the sets today should be pretty much reliable..

However 4K BR players are only just arriving.  Two models from Panasonic and Samsung are first generation and most 4K movies to buy are really shot in 2K.  Yes you can stream from Netflix, but only if you have fibre optic broadband.

Sky are now on the verge of showing 4K content, but as yet no mention of prices or movie quality.

Would it not be best to wait until Sony and Oppo are on their second generation of 4K players and Sky are awash with 4K content and sport.   AND you can but from Amazon Blade Runner, LOTR Trilogy, Star Wars 1-5 and Gone With The Wind all in 4K.

Just a thought and wish.

I need a replacement for a 2007 iMac that I have been using for occasional streaming of internet video contents (dch, theoperaplatform, etc.) and I have been considering a 4K tv. But I cannot get myself to buy one. Even if one restricts the choice to the top brands, the range of possibilities is huge. At the same time, getting precise specs for today's tv sets seems nearly impossible: does the optical SPDIF output of the newest Samsung devices support high resolution audio? How good is support for streaming contents from, e.g., 'theoperaplatform.eu'? I really do not want to have a big, black screen permanently set up in my living room to stare at. The devices I came across lately were far too big and often quite hugly: inconsistent mixture of glossy and matt finishing, pretentious design, ugly flatscreen rear sides, etc. Also, I had the impression that the most expensive devices were delivering the most artificial picture quality (e.g., Samsung SUHD, perhaps they had just been setup poorly but then, why so?). The 40'' Samsung Serif looks quite acceptable but is not available in Germany and detailed technical specs or reviews are virtually unavailable. I guess that I will wait for the new iMac 2016.

nbpf, I fully recogize what you write. All vendors seem to supply only very limited information about the precise details of the product. My main concern is always what happens when I feed it with hdmi, what will the tv pass through on the digital audio port(s). Does it convert? If so, to stereo / DD / DPL?

Personally, I do like one of the products of your country, the Loewe Connect series. These TV's don't screem for attention to you when you enter a shop like the Samsungs (Samsungs: look at me! I can display fully satured neon colors! 'optimized for Teletubbies' kind of screens). And Loewes have a nice rear side.

Saddly too expensive for me, so I've just ordered the Art 40 UHD. Lets see what's on that digital audio out connection ...

Looking forward to see Berliner Philharmoniker on it ...

Ardbeg10y posted:

Saddly too expensive for me, so I've just ordered the Art 40 UHD. Lets see what's on that digital audio out connection ...

Looking forward to see Berliner Philharmoniker on it ...

Very nice device! Enjoy the BP and, please, report your experience with the DCH application. For the Loewe series, one can even buy two or three differnt and well designed floor stands! Samsung, Sony, Panasonic and the likes seem to assume that all their customers are going to put their mostly oversized devices on the walls of their living rooms ... crazy world!

The question is whether the Loewe have a usable optical Toslink output (I need one to directly connect to the Naim DAC) or, alternatively, whether they support USB audio class devices (I could use a Meridian Explorer as a USB to Toslink interface, this works fine on a iMac). Another question is whether the Loewe support browsing internet contents and streaming, e.g., form 'theoperaplatform'. I will try to get some more information.

Ardbeg10y posted:

Personally, I do like one of the products of your country, the Loewe Connect series. These TV's don't screem for attention to you when you enter a shop like the Samsungs (Samsungs: look at me! I can display fully satured neon colors! 'optimized for Teletubbies' kind of screens). And Loewes have a nice rear side.

 

That's a strange thing to post. As NBPF mentions, the problem with many shops that sell TVs is that they're often poorly set up. Luckily, there are many places you can go where they've taken the trouble to optimise the picture quality, and allow you to fiddle with the picture some more, should you so desire.  Having done so myself, I can assure you that the latest Samsungs have a superb picture quality, the best I've seen so far. In the UK, Loewe are ridiculously expensive and nothing special. You can make them display "fully satured (sic) colours" if you want!

PS, NBPF - Samsung audio specs -

nbpf, pardon my ignorance, but what is DCH?

The Loewe Art series do not have an optical Toslink output. It has a digital coax out which should fit in your nDac as well (assuming nDac here, could be the DAC V1 as well).

Once the telly is there, I will analyze what kind of codex are there on the digital audio out (coax) and share my impressions.

@tonym: many thanks for the Samsung specs! I am sure that one can easily set up Samsung (Sony, Panasonic, etc.) devices to deliver very natural pictures. I am slightly more concerned about upscaling and other digital effects that I have only noticed on tv sets, not on iMacs. I have watched a BP concert on a small (about 40'') Samsung UHD device and it was gorgeous. The major concerns that I have against a tv set are portability (I really want to be able to have the tv out of the living room when not in use) and the support for standard internet browsing (I want to be able to watch streams for which device specific apps are not available, e.g., from theoperaplatform.eu).

@ardbeg10y: sorry for the unexplained acronym! I have used DCH for Digital Concert Hall. If you are going to watch the Berliner Philharmoniker on your new Loewe tv, you will most likely do that using the pre-installed DCH app. Alternatively, you could just point your browser to https://www.digitalconcerthall.com/de/home if the Loewe supports  internet browsing. I think it would be worth trying both: I do not know how timely Loewe, Samsung, Sony, etc. update their DCH apps. This is also another concern that I have against buying a tv set against a plain iMac.

Tonym, It is not directly the Samsung(TV)-as-such which is a problem for me. It is the dominance on the market / marketing strategies / what I don't like. When one of my fiends needs a new tv, they just run to the big shops and buy the biggest / most visible one. I don't get that culture.

However someone could buy a Samsung in the way you did (respect), I prefer European build solid products. That's why I have Naim, and also a Loewe soon. I know I pay more, but I am happy to know that it is very likely that these companies actually care about their people as well. Think social security / pensions / sickness leaves etc ... these things are in general done well in Europe. I do not say that Samsung is on the bad side, but I trust European companies more.

Apart from these personal preferences, both Loewe and Naim have metal cases. In my young family with almost 4 kids it is likely that these devices survive. For Naim, I'm sure it survives (proven!). For Loewe, I need to see, but the case is aluminium and it's too heavy for a kid to move it.

Did I alread mention the need for an extra soundbar on almost all tv's (but not needed for Loewe since it has proper speakers)? Hey, the difference between Loewe / B&O and the asian mass market starts to be smaller!

Now I need to see how Naim / Loewe can be combined :-)

nbpf, maybe a new iMac is indeed the best solution! Thanks for the clarification on the DCH. I came across the Digital Concert Hall already but did not connect it to its acronym until you explained.

Ardbeg10y posted:

I prefer European build solid products. That's why I have Naim, and also a Loewe soon.

I thought that after the bankruptcy Loewe signed an agreement to get it's technology e.g. panels and software from Hisense

GregW posted:

Ardbeg10y posted:

I prefer European build solid products. That's why I have Naim, and also a Loewe soon.

I thought that after the bankruptcy Loewe signed an agreement to get it's technology e.g. panels and software from Hisense

Correct.  Though "built" in Germany fwiw. Earlier models used panels from Samsung amongst others.

In general I've found Panasonic to consistently produce tellys better than most if not all others, my only diversion was when I wanted a small TV for a small room (32") where I went for an LG because it was the thinnest, which was important. (Picture quality OK, but its OSD is highly frustrating as it auto cancels far to quickly, not user settable.) If the present 4k Panasonic is 1st generation as indicated by the OP, then I suggest waiting for a new release: why the hurry to buy now if the technology is likely to still be improving, with so little material available?

Innocent Bystander posted:

In general I've found Panasonic to consistently produce tellys better than most if not all others, my only diversion was when I wanted a small TV for a small room (32") where I went for an LG because it was the thinnest, which was important. (Picture quality OK, but its OSD is highly frustrating as it auto cancels far to quickly, not user settable.) If the present 4k Panasonic is 1st generation as indicated by the OP, then I suggest waiting for a new release: why the hurry to buy now if the technology is likely to still be improving, with so little material available?

Panasonic no longer make display panels for their own TVs either...

I also think the main advantage of these newer 4K TVs is HDR. However, I believe there are two competing technologies so it might be prudent to wait until a standard is agreed upon by the manufacturers. I've never been a big fan of up-converting personally. If the pixels/information isn't there then how can you expect a more realistic picture when the TV "adds" the missing information.

What annoys me is that cable providers here in North America still can't broadcast 1080p but now they are trying to push 4K. Perhaps the codecs have improved but at what cost in terms of picture quality? Blu-ray still is the best way to watch these higher rez videos but the content is quite minimal.

Oh and now Japan is offering 8K!

Arun

Arun Mehan posted:

I also think the main advantage of these newer 4K TVs is HDR. However, I believe there are two competing technologies so it might be prudent to wait until a standard is agreed upon by the manufacturers. I've never been a big fan of up-converting personally. If the pixels/information isn't there then how can you expect a more realistic picture when the TV "adds" the missing information.

Arun

That depends on how good the TV or other device is at upscaling. For many years I used Lumagen video processors, which used a very sophisticated algorithm to work out just what needed to be "filled in" from the surrounding pixels, and they made a very good job of it. Since TVs have become more sophisticated I don't think seperate video processors are necessary (although to be fair I've not used one for a while). Upshot is, my latest Samsung 4K HDR TV makes everything look wonderful, even standard definition broadcasts.