Plasma, LCD, OLED, LED, best tv for next gen

lostinblue said:
Congratulations on the purchase, I really think it's easily the best mass produced TV on sale this year.
Click to expand...

Any suggestions as to how to set it up and stuff? This is my first plasma. I know Disney WOW is stringly suggested, so I will grab that. I have my Xbox One and PS4 also. I know there was something about setting up inputs I heard.
 
ParityBit said:
Any suggestions as to how to set it up and stuff? This is my first plasma. I know Disney WOW is stringly suggested, so I will grab that. I have my Xbox One and PS4 also. I know there was something about setting up inputs I heard.
Click to expand...
Well, first of all, Plasmas have a break-in period, this means image gets gradually better in the first hundreds of hours and it's most sensitive to long periods of still images then and there, this on Panasonic Plasmas, which is what I have had in the last few years.

Still images and static logos cause retention on most plasmas and that combined with a new panel without wear can take a while to clean (older plasmas who were very prone to retention will still get it no matter how old they are, but after a few thousand hours of use it just goes away really fast - the later plasmas are way less prone to IR but it's impossible to negate that behavior completely, unless you look for it though you might as well never notice it throughout the lifespan of the device, as a lot of people that have plasmas not knowing the difference between them and LCD didn't), the more brightness being used the heavier the effect will be because this phenomena is based on photo sensitivity, which is another reason for the already mentioned ABL (auto brightness limitation) and eco modes being in place. Professional plasmas lack it altogether both because they're not bound by energy star but they also either have break-in done on factory or Panasonic (and Sony, Pioneer and Fujitsu before) thought a pro consumer knew what it was doing, I suspect it's the first I don't see brands trusting no one.

At some point artificial break-in was recommended by brands themselves (artificial break in is flashing slides non-stop usually full frame red, green and blue but sometimes and more recently also other colors like white, and a scale of greys), but that was a hassle, still I did it for my first plasma back in... 2004 (?) and for my last one, a 65VT60, just because.

I didn't bother for the ones in between and I abused one of them for gaming right out of the box, it got some persistent IR until the panel matured, then never had such tendencies again.


I understand Samsung plasmas are next to immune to persistent IR and/or burn in compared to Panasonic plasmas and even while new so I think you can forego the hassle altogether of running slides, I don't even think it's mandatory for the Panasonic's. This said because they were so resilient with IR is the reason they could pull the very bright F8500, so it should be pretty good, but initially not as immune if outputting the kind of brightness it can output.


Not putting brightness to the max from the moment it gets out of the box is sound advise because as I said, phosphor in the plasma is photo sensitive. I believe most panasonic early-hours of use plasma issues stem from that, because mostly well informed chaps were doing the purchase, so they got home and splashed some custom settings made by a dude that had done the break-in first. They were only informed to a fault.

TV channels don't warrant special settings on my TV's the image quality is not good enough and it's too hit and miss changing settings for that, so I keep it dimmer than the settings for gaming and movies. Don't be shy about seeing a few HD movies on it with the settings you want if you go back to see TV or doing something else afterwards... Specially if they are full screen, pixar movies are regarded as great to break-in plasmas, because they are really colorful and full screen (16:9) you can use whatever brightness you want on those on any Plasma, OLED, CRT... anything with retention characteristics.

If not for that or select use just to see how it looks (throughout the duration of a whole movie or two) I'd wait roughly 300 hours before going all out on settings for any plasma, albeit I think you can get away with it on a Samsung if I actually did it on a Panasonic before. :P But I had to monitor it and be certain it was all only persistent.


Tips to set it up... I recommend letting Pixel Shift options on, Pixel Shift/Orbiter is a routine that gradually changes the pixels position, it's not very noticeable, I've never noticed it while gaming, only when using a PC plugged onto it and even there it didn't bother me, and it really helps with retention not "sticking", I'd leave it on for the first hours, it's still on on my gaming set after I recently tested it when I used it as a PC monitor for a few days.

Samsung's lowest input lag mode is usually not Game mode, but gets triggered by renaming the port you're using to "PC". I don't know if that turns Pixel Shift to off, but I'm guessing no. It also turns on 4:4:4 reproduction which is useless for movies, but good for Console and PC gaming to be sure.


Blacks are better/deeper with Black Optimizer set to Dark Room, Off is just there for you to see what you would be missing if the TV lacked it.

One of the first things I do on any TV is toning down sharpness to zero, this is particularly relevant for gaming and stuff being output at the panel native resolution, sharpness will only increase jaggies.

Also, be sure to set consoles properly, I know PS4 detects Sony Tv's really well, but I don't know how it does for a Samsung, so I would force both to Full Range so that games gain that extra oomph. Same for XBone.
 
ParityBit said:
Wow, thank you. I am leaning strongly for this set. I was going to go to BesbtBuy Magnolia's today to see if they have it setup. I have been considering holding off on 4K until OLED's come down in price. Gaming and sports is what I will be using this for mostly.

I just do not want to have a $3k regret on my shoulders.
Click to expand...

You want the F8500, trust me.

DM3Jbk0.jpg
 
Gaf, I need recommendations!
I am Looking for a 60 inch under $1200, primary use will be with PS4 and Wii U for games and netflix.
I care mostly about image quality... I don't care about Smart TV functionnalities as I will be using all that from the PS4 and I will probably get a sound bar so sound doesn't matter much! I also don't care about 3D!
 
dock said:
Bravia 50w829 questions (possibly true of all current bravias).

Is it possible to rename the HDMI and other input ports? The PS3 name is picked up via Bravia Sync, but I'd like to name my Wii U channel, etc. My 1998 era Sony TV had good channel/input renaming, lol.

Is it possible to set the remote to shortcuts to different inputs? I don't use TV so I'd prefer for 1, 2, 3 etc to switch inputs. Again, my 1998 Sony TV was great for this! :D


Turns out, this morning, I won that PS4! :D
Click to expand...

To change input names press the big HOME button in the center of the TV remote then navigate across the top right of the screen to :
SETTINGS -> CHANNELS AND INPUTS -> MANAGE INPUTS
You can select from preset labels or select the 'Edit:' label to input your own text.

I'd also highly recommend ensuring you have the Eco light sensor toggled off while you're near. Go to :
SETTINGS>PREFERENCES>ECO>LIGHT SENSOR: OFF
 
So I am looking for a new 55" TV for gaming and the occasional movie. I want to have the input lag low, but not necessarily minimum. A lag of about 30ms is fine with me if I can get better picture quality out of it. Does anyone have any recommendations of a TV with low input lag but with good picture quality?

If not I was leaning towards the Sony KDL-55W950B. If I can't find better picture quality, might as go for really low input lag. Anyone have experience with this model?
 
That f8500 is beautiful and comes in 51", which at 119,1 cm wide is the largest I can fit in my 120cm shelf.
But still 1400...damn should have grabbed that gt60 when it dropped below 1200..
 
ParityBit said:
I can't wait for Tuesday! Now I need to decide on 7.1 or 5.1 and get sound! I am really clueless when it comes to that.
Click to expand...
2.1, 5.1 or 7.1 are additive configurations seeing you can add modules to a 2.1 set until it's 5:1 just as you can add speakers to a 5.1 one until it is 7.1... so that decision is nowhere near as important as the speaker quality you choose to go with or which receiver you want.

Allow me to explain, a lot of receivers like this one (a best seller over here) are price/quality, but look at impedance, it's 6 Ohms. Now look at some mid-range enthusiast speaker specs.

8 Ohms, meaning you're screwed (and most good speakers after a certain price range are 8 Ohms). Happens to a lot of people these days, they start upgrading their speakers thinking their receiver/amp is good and will suffice only to find it's 4/6 Ohms... and while a 8 Ohm receiver can deal fine with 6 and 4 Ohm speakers, lesser Ohm receivers/amps can't really deal with higher, so you either don't use it past a threshold or it might overheat, shut down, not work at all, stuff like that. They're not "rated" for that.

My gaming room has a 2.1 configuration (Teac A-H300+8 Ohm monitor audio speakers) and that sounds better than a lot of 5.1 and 7.1 configs I've heard (at some point it sounded better than my other living room 5.1 config), of course it's basically stereo so there's no sound coming from behind or anything, but it's down to clarity and range. It's like having stereo headphones that sound better than surround headphones, not that hard to do if one of them has crap speakers going on.

I don't recommend buying bundle kits because they're either overpriced or not that good (usually both), just buy a good receiver and then add some speakers on top, but think about them as a long term thing you're buying piece by piece. I usually buy my speakers second hand because sound is not something that get's re-invented every two years hence, speakers from the 90's are mighty fine, often better than the ones being sold today too and are still compatible... And they're cheaper. Only rules is choosing good ones, non damaged and buy them in pairs (minus the subwoofer). Best speakers should be the front ones, as the rear ones are mostly for ambiance but the better they are the better, but if you have two pairs and one has front port bass reflex and the others don't, those should be in front, or if one of these has a bigger watt rating, also.

Starting with something as low as a 2.0/2.1 configuration due to costs is not a bad thing if those speakers and amplifier (in this case receiver/amp) are good, it's better in my book than pulling a "this is sparta" at one point and just selling some bundle kit for half what it originally cost. I also enjoy the "I added this in and this is the difference" you know, feeling the improvements, as opposed to now even knowing whatever each part of the setup is doing because it was always complete from the moment it got home.

You probably can build something really good with receiver+$300 of second hand speakers.
 
ParityBit said:
My current system is an old 5.1. It is an Onkyo TX-SR703 and S200 front/surround. MC400 front an a P200 sub.
Click to expand...
That's not bad at all! I'm used to people with Creative Z5500 5.1 sets or those Samsung 5.1/7.1 kits with a receiver/amp/bluray thing. Or worse.

The receiver is quite old now, but I bet it's pretty good (as you can see, it's 8 Ohm ready and it's like I said, sound simply doesn't get re-invented), but it lacks ARC and HDMI-ins which are very handy these days (you won't be able to take surround out of a Wii U for instance, or get better sound than DTS out of modern media). But it's otherwise good enough to drive the rest of your devices providing it's DTS coming out of the TV optical out, that's not the best quality sound there is now but it's certainly good enough. Anyone can live with that.

As for the speakers, quick google shows me good speakers in there, Cambridge Soundworks, right?


I don't think there's a world of difference between 5.1 and 7.1 so unless something sounds broken/like it could be improved tomorrow I'd just replace the receiver in due time, but perhaps wait until they are fully HDMI 2.0 complaint and can downscale 4K to 2K which will come in handy in years to come, 4K is not all that important or noticeable of an improvement (if at all) but the capability to feed 4K and get 2K in return is nice because the TV won't be able to do it.

4K blu-rays will still be 4:2:0, in fact current HDMI 2.0 implementations on 4K TV's are bound to 4:2:0 from the moment they hit a certain number of frames/hertz due to bandwidth limitations (I believe Unknown Soldier mentioned it as recently as last page edit: yup), but 4K 4:2:0 downscaled onto 2K is not necessarily 4:2:0 if using 4:4:4 gamut whilst being merged down (you can imagine why by going here and looking at the images, note 4:4:4 and "original" are pretty much the same, so if one takes a 4:2:0 image and samples it down with full color sampling it won't be 4:2:0).

I find it ironic that the biggest gain in 4K Blurays might be 2K playback even if the next step they should have given would be 48/60 fps support, full range rgb and 4:4:4 encoding on 2K before moving on. These 4K discs won't run on current Bluray players (bar the PS4, probably) but they'll most likely downscale to 1080p and 720p sets just fine. The receiver also being able to do it though is certainly nice to have,

Also, for games downscaling can be a lot like super sampling and reduce jaggies. (if taken care by a receiver added input lag will be a factor though)
 
They could define 4K Blu-ray as 4:4:4 if they wanted to, God knows Blu-ray has enough capacity if they move to quad-layers and bandwidth as the current 1080p Blu-ray spec only spins the disc at 2x and there's plenty of room to grow, up to 12x spin rate. The idiots who supported the now in retrospect astonishingly shitty HD DVD must be amazed now at how Blu-ray has grown and continues to have the capability to grow. 1080p frame-packed 3D is pretty cool, but 4K Blu-ray on 100GB capacity discs with 80-120 Mbps bandwidth would be just plain fucking bad-ass.

The 4K Blu-ray standard isn't defined yet and I don't even know how far BDA is in that process, but if they wanted to, they could define 4K Blu-ray as 4K/60 4:4:4 + 12-bit color if they felt like it. Honestly though for filmed content 4:2:0 is more than adequate, human vision has such poor chroma resolution that defining a home cinema standard with a 4:4:4 chroma encoding would be a huge waste of capacity and bandwidth which could be spent on something cool like frame-packed 4K 3D support. Of course we would need 8K TVs with passive 3D or 4K TVs with active 3D to get full 4K 3D resolution, I don't even think the current 4K TVs can do that.
 
Anyone checked out Sony's new 60" non-3D line TV? KDL60W630B - http://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-60...hdtv/5006023.p?id=1219106283977&skuId=5006023

Was wanting to get it because I have no use for 3D and it's $300 cheaper than the KDL60W850B http://www.bestbuy.com/site/sony-br...hdtv/3419019.p?id=1219091130365&skuId=3419019

The 850B has 3D but also the input lag is only 23ms. I would really like to get that 630B I just don't know the input lag on it and it's such a new TV I can't find very many reviews on it. Would hate to buy it and find out it's trash. Granted I don't believe any Sony TV would be bad. They seem to be THE brand to go to for low input lag when it comes to bigger screens.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
They could define 4K Blu-ray as 4:4:4 if they wanted to, God knows Blu-ray has enough capacity if they move to quad-layers and bandwidth as the current 1080p Blu-ray spec only spins the disc at 2x and there's plenty of room to grow, up to 12x spin rate.
Click to expand...
That's true, but it's still a shit decision, that and limited range still being in as opposed to full range.

I feel that per pixel, we're getting nothing out of 4K, and rebating it, either naturally from the couch or via downsampling... We get something but I might have gotten a 2K 4:4:4 full range 60 fps specification.

They obviously don't want to go for 12x continuous speed of reading though, which is why the bandwidth it takes for 4K 4:2:0 should have been used for proper 2K "ultimate" spec instead.
Unknown Soldier said:
The idiots who supported the now in retrospect astonishingly shitty HD DVD must be amazed now at how Blu-ray has grown and continues to have the capability to grow.
Click to expand...
I'm not the sort of dude that forgets his long gone ideas of the situation circa 2006.

I was pro-HD DVD back then, not because it was better (it wasn't, I never had that delusion) but because it was a DVD overdrive format, same factory/disc pressing lines could be used with little upgrades and lasers could be used and I liked the idea of first layer being DVD compatible and second containing the actual movie, which was proposed. Blu ray also had something like this but because pressing lines are different it proved to be expensive.

Understand from my point of view both of these have been obstacles Blu Ray has faced, most people still have DVD players and not bluray ones god knows why, same would be true for HD DVD but at least then most movies could be HD DVD ones with a DVD layer going on.

As a enthusiast I prefer bluray (obviously, I imagine HD DVD if alive today to be something between bluray and web streaming) but as a consumer who still sees DVD everywhere actually selling I wish we had HD DVD and then Bluray. So that Bluray readers would read HD DVD in the same sense they read DVD.

I hate seeing DVD of new movies on the shelfs at this point, I resent them (even because over here the bluray version is often absent)... I wish they were HD DVD Hybrid at least.
Unknown Soldier said:
The 4K Blu-ray standard isn't defined yet and I don't even know how far BDA is in that process, but if they wanted to, they could define 4K Blu-ray as 4K/60 4:4:4 + 12-bit color if they felt like it. Honestly though for filmed content 4:2:0 is more than adequate, human vision has such poor chroma resolution that defining a home cinema standard with a 4:4:4 chroma encoding would be a huge waste of capacity and bandwidth which could be spent on something cool like frame-packed 4K 3D support. Of course we would need 8K TVs with passive 3D or 4K TVs with active 3D to get full 4K 3D resolution, I don't even think the current 4K TVs can do that.
Click to expand...
I doubt 3D is a focus for them now.

I know chroma subsampling can be subtle, but I do notice it and after all these years think it should be resolved. I actually don't need 4K video just like I don't need a 4K television, what I think I need is pixel perfect video, finally. You know, like an encode that 100 years from now at that resolution the encode can still be regarded as ultimate or at least very respectable, nothing else to do there. (impossible with lossy formats, but hey, I'm know I'm kinda idealistic)
ParityBit said:
Is this a good choice? I want it future proof.

Denon AVR-X2100W 7.2 Channel Full 4K Ultra HD A/V Receiver with Bluetooth and Wi-Fi
Click to expand...
That's a good one and I doubt you'll miss features for quite a few years, but in my case I'm waiting for the final HDMI 2.0 spec and full implementation to be ready for market (or HDMI 2.1 to hit, actually) because 4K is all happening too fast and around the clock... Chips and specifications are not ready 100% yet. Incompatibilities and bandwidth limitations will most likely be subtle for most implementations, but I'll wait a while longer, hope by Q4 2015 the current confusion is all gone and we have a final H.265 media player/Bluray 4K spec set on stone, as well as 4:4:4 full range with 60 fps support on the bandwidth+chipset side.

I don't know if that receiver can passthrough hdmi 2.0 (18Gbps) or is hdmi 2.0 down to features but limited to 10.2Gbps. (which means it can only "read" 4K @ 30 fps and 4:2:0, which is where all TV's are sitting now, I believe) and that's worth knowing for sure but manufacturers are not talking a whole lot about that.

But as Unknown Soldier put it... 4:4:4 and full range would be better but not a lot better and this is what you could be effectively sacrificing (and I believe 4:4:4 uses up to 4 times the bandwidth normal 4:2:0 does on the video codec side) so yeah. Accepting and converting 48/60 fps to the proper framerate in 2K is important in my book though, because while these TV's will never accept 4K they accept higher framerates and everything else we've been talking about.

And I don't know it converts 30 fps 4K into 2K at all even, it's a doubt I've had regarding all 4K receivers for a few months now, do they upscale or also downscale? Never seen it answered.
 
lostinblue said:
I don't know if that receiver can passthrough hdmi 2.0 (18Gbps) or is hdmi 2.0 down to features but limited to 10.2Gbps. (which means it can only "read" 4K @ 30 fps and 4:2:0, which is where all TV's are sitting now, I believe) and that's worth knowing for sure but manufacturers are not talking a whole lot about that.

But as Unknown Soldier put it... 4:4:4 and full range would be better but not a lot better and this is what you could be effectively sacrificing (and I believe 4:4:4 uses up to 4 times the bandwidth normal 4:2:0 does on the video codec side) so yeah. Accepting and converting 48/60 fps to the proper framerate in 2K is important in my book though, because while these TV's will never accept 4K they accept higher framerates and everything else we've been talking about.

And I don't know it converts 30 fps 4K into 2K at all even, it's a doubt I've had regarding all 4K receivers for a few months now, do they upscale or also downscale? Never seen it answered.
Click to expand...

I dont think I can wait like you can!

Amazon says ...

Ultra HD 4K 60 Hz video pass-through; 4:4:4 Pure Color pass-through
 
ParityBit said:
I dont think I can wait like you can!
Click to expand...
Understandable.

Even though I say I'll wait sometimes I don't, I mean I don't know if I'll need a receiver 6 months from now because mine bites the dust. If that happens I'll probably not wait. I'm lucky enough to have HDMI ports on mine, I don't think I could live without that at this point because my living room TV only has 3 of them (top range panasonic=3 ports... figures)

Playing the waiting game is not always to our advantage as there's always the "next big thing" on the corner, I can think of a few situations where I could have bought something and enjoyed it way before I caved in, because I was waiting for something to happen... and it didn't.

Thankfully for receivers, the most important thing, which is dealing with sound is stable now, doesn't seem like they'll up their game anytime soon there (which they did since 2006/your current receiver with sound bandwidth that surpasses the one on optical outs).
ParityBit said:
Ultra HD 4K 60 Hz video pass-through; 4:4:4 Pure Color pass-through
Click to expand...
It's perfectly fine then. Won't be able to process it so relying on it is useless (one less thing to care about if we look on the bright side) but it passes it through which is what we usually tell our receivers to do with the sources they get fed anyway. Shame it doesn't downsample 4K into 2K, but I'm sure nothing does at this point (and bluray 4K readers and consoles will, it's down to one less device that could pull it/overide them)

I read the full spec sheet for it now, I might have missed something but it definitely looks good.
 
ParityBit said:
I dont think I can wait like you can!

Amazon says ...

Ultra HD 4K 60 Hz video pass-through; 4:4:4 Pure Color pass-through
Click to expand...

You should also make sure it supports HDCP 2.2 on it's HDMI 2.0 inputs. This isn't important now but it will probably become really important when 4K Blu-ray comes around.

My receiver is still on HDMI 1.3a and it's a huge pain in the ass trying to pass Blu-ray 3D through my home theater, don't make the mistake I did and buy a receiver one year too early. If I had just waited one year I could have had HDMI 1.4.
 
Good point, I reckon hearing HDCP 2.2 this year only on Onkyo's, but that was a few months ago and most other manufacturers weren't talking (which was a bad sign) but who knows... it's a market I haven't really been following. Might turn out to be possible on some via firmware update perhaps but I wouldn't count on it.

I have a HDMI 1.4 receiver upstairs, thank god or I would be pretty much stranded with DTS. I hope to buy a new one sometime and bring that one into the game room. But I can wait.
 
I have an Onkyo now, but when I read on AVS it is considered a lower end company now? Is that true? I don't want to buy crapola!

How about the rest of the features? I am skeptical because it is cheaper than the Danon.
 
ParityBit said:
I have an Onkyo now, but when I read on AVS it is considered a lower end company now? Is that true? I don't want to buy crapola!
Click to expand...
I don't think it is, they might have cheaper models and cheaper priceranges others don't go and that's being "lower end" these days, but they certainly meet high up.

I'm not sure they're the best in operation, but I haven't heard anything damning. And in this case HDCP 2.2 is that extra I'm sure competitors are working around the clock to have, it'll be really important for copyrighted video playback.
ParityBit said:
How about the rest of the features? I am skeptical because it is cheaper than the Danon.
Click to expand...
That's what I've been trying to see.

Featurewise they seem to equal or beat the Denon be it in downright power rating or actual software features, it's missing one hdmi port (7 inputs as opposed to 8 on the Denon) but otherwise I don't notice much difference.

Thing that confused the shit out of me was the impedance, because the european site only talked about 6 Ohms, had to get into the pdf spec sheet to read about 8 Ohm's being supported. So double check that, I'm 95% sure it has what it takes, but I don't understand why all they only had this:

AMPLIFIER FEATURES

160 W/Ch (6 Ω, 1 kHz, 1% THD, 1 Channel Driven, IEC); 175 W/Ch (6 Ω, 1 kHz, 1 Channel Driven, JEITA)
Click to expand...
Source: http://www.eu.onkyo.com/en/products/tx-nr636-98893.html?tab=Details

On their technical details online page "if" it supports 8 Ohms, because as I said, 8 Ohm support is huge, it's one of the most important bullet points for a lot of people who already have speakers (and usually good ones at that).


I think your speakers are 8 Ohms, which would be a strong reason to make sure it has the right rating to drive them.

EDIT: Yup, Cambridge Soundworks MC400, P200 and S200 speakers are all 8 Ohms.
 
All this talk of ohms I'm afraid you are getting the wrong impressions. Probably about 90% of receivers are 6-16ohms. when you get up to a very nice set of speakers they will probably have a lower nominal impedance of 4ohms.

This isn't to say your receiver rated 6-16 ohms won't work it will just run hot most llikely. If you crank the volume you run the risk of overheating the unit (lower ohms more heat).

With the speakers you have don't even worry about ohms, my post about a pre-amp was more for low impedance speakers (4 ohms). Many rreceivers now allow for bi-wiring for higher end speakers so that you may split the high and lows into the front L and R and use up the 7.1 surround L and R to take off some of the stress of the receiver.

Those onkyo systems your looking at will do what you want, don't fall for the you need a 2k avr.
 
I would not spend $700 on an Onkyo...

If you're looking to spend that much look at Marantz or something.
 
Some info from a Pioneer rep on AVS...

Regarding HDCP 2.2, none of our AVR's support it this year. Pioneer (As well as Denon and Yamaha) opted for full bandwidth HDMI 2.0 (18gbps) so that we can support 4:4:4 content as well as high dynamic range and expanded color gamut signals which require more that 10.2gbps. There currently is not a single chip solution that offers both 18gbps and HDCP 2.2. Onkyo decided to go with HDCP 2.2 by using a different brand HDMI repeater, however there HDMI 2.0 solution only offers 10.2gbps of bandwidth (Same has HDMI 1.4).

Another reason was the lack of HDCP 2.2 source hardware. The only piece I am aware of is the Sony 4K server which also does additional checks to make sure it is connected to a Sony TV in order to work.
Click to expand...

Seems to be the same issue with televisions as they all must support HDCP 2.2 over full bandwidth HDMI.

From what I've read the biggest complaint on the new Onkyo receivers is that they dumped Audyssey for AccuEQ.
 
I've heard Onkyos have a tendency to self-destruct after the warranty is expired.

My receiver is a Denon and its been solid as a rock the past 4 years of ownership. Demon's UI makes me want to punch kittens sometimes but I can't deny that it has performed well.
 
Okay GAF. I'm looking for a HDTV for my brother that's around 40 inches or so with great picture quality and low input lag. He doesn't care about Smart TV or 3D aspects at all, so that makes no difference.

I was very interested in the Sony KDL42W705B, before I realized that it wasn't available over here in America. (Darn EuroGAF getting the best TVs...) I fount the KDL48W600B while looking for a good equivalent, and was wondering if it would be worth it. It doesn't seem like it has as good of input lag or picture quality though. =/

His budget is about $800 at the very max. I've heard quite a lot of good things about Sony HDTVs within the past few years... am I on the right track?
 
ParityBit said:
Ugh. So I guess I am back to the Denon I listed above? No HDCP 2.2, but everything else? And what is the 3D ready I keep seeing?
Click to expand...

3d reasy as in you have a 3d TV you run the cable from TV to receiver. If you have a 3d bluray player (ps3) you can run that into the receiver and still get a 3d signal.

Basically you can run 3d through the receiver you don't have to go direct to the TV.
 
wowzors said:
3d reasy as in you have a 3d TV you run the cable from TV to receiver. If you have a 3d bluray player (ps3) you can run that into the receiver and still get a 3d signal.

Basically you can run 3d through the receiver you don't have to go direct to the TV.
Click to expand...

How do know if the receiver has it or not? Like the Denon or the Onkyo?
 
Hey guys, I might be coming into some decent money soon and I am going to totally turn the third bedroom into a gaming room and I just wanted to know what you guys thought of this selection of components.

I want to buy a really nice TV but I don't really want to go plasma, and as nice as the XBR units are I don't think I can justify spending nearly my entire budget on just the TV. The thing that drives me nuts with a lot of TVs is image lag and not so much input lag, I spent a good 15 minutes carefully looking at some TVs today looking for signs of image lag and thankfully the sets I was looking at didn't seem to have any ghosting. That said I also like to have really nice Picture Quality, so if you guys can weigh in on potential TV options or experience with the items below that'd be great, thanks.

Sound is kind of a mute point with the tv since I am buying my first surround system, I am sort of an audiophile but not to any serious extremes.

Sound system:

Denon AVR-E300

Boston Acoustics Sound Wave XS 5.1 speakers

TV:

KDL60W850B

Finally, as far as other things I'm buying a shit ton of games, a Wii U, a PS4, a kegerator, and some PC upgrades as well.
 
I still don't trust plasma. I have seen too much burn-in to be satisfied that I wouldn't be wasting my money. (I know about running disks or running your TV for two days straight to stop this kind of thing from happening, but that ain't gonna happen.)
 
wowzors said:
All this talk of ohms I'm afraid you are getting the wrong impressions. Probably about 90% of receivers are 6-16ohms. when you get up to a very nice set of speakers they will probably have a lower nominal impedance of 4ohms.

This isn't to say your receiver rated 6-16 ohms won't work it will just run hot most llikely. If you crank the volume you run the risk of overheating the unit (lower ohms more heat).
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the thing to avoid.

It virtually can't damage the receiver as it'll force shutdown before that happens but it's better if everything just cooperates.

I've mentioned it because selling 6 Ohm Receivers is common and in those cases the jump to 8 Ohm should be given or one could be in the market for a replacement in 2 years or so.
wowzors said:
Those onkyo systems your looking at will do what you want, don't fall for the you need a 2k avr.
Click to expand...
yeah, no doubt, it's just the low price/quality solutions that won't.
MrJames said:
Some info from a Pioneer rep on AVS...

Regarding HDCP 2.2, none of our AVR's support it this year. Pioneer (As well as Denon and Yamaha) opted for full bandwidth HDMI 2.0 (18gbps) so that we can support 4:4:4 content as well as high dynamic range and expanded color gamut signals which require more that 10.2gbps. There currently is not a single chip solution that offers both 18gbps and HDCP 2.2. Onkyo decided to go with HDCP 2.2 by using a different brand HDMI repeater, however there HDMI 2.0 solution only offers 10.2gbps of bandwidth (Same has HDMI 1.4).

Another reason was the lack of HDCP 2.2 source hardware. The only piece I am aware of is the Sony 4K server which also does additional checks to make sure it is connected to a Sony TV in order to work.
Click to expand...

Seems to be the same issue with televisions as they all must support HDCP 2.2 over full bandwidth HDMI.

From what I've read the biggest complaint on the new Onkyo receivers is that they dumped Audyssey for AccuEQ.
Click to expand...
That's enlightening.

That means they're all incomplete implementations this year. And that sucks as none are really future proof. But I feel like it might also be a rewording of what we were already saying while throwing the 10.2 Gbps out there... Seeing it's a Pioneer guy talking he can't be called impartial even if he sounds pretty sane, so I'll try to apply a gain of salt.


Does the Onkyo passthrough implementation allow 18 Gbps? Because they clearly state "4K/60 Hz-Capable HDMI" if it didn't support 18 Gbps, 60 hz shouldn't be possible in 4K even at 4:2:0 and limited range, only 30 fps (or am I wrong?). If it's "processing it" as applying processing on top, that's a fair point to be sure and I can see that being internally limited to 10.2 gbps from the second passthrough is not enabled, but... passthrough is for sure the predef mode on most receivers so the absence of proper processing capabilities for 4K is not that bad as long as it passes it through with HDCP 2.2 - the opposite won't work which is trying to see a 4K bluray with full bandwisth but no HDCP 2.2.

Question is... will either of these even work? I still feel the Onkyo might have the best odds albeit only being able to act as a switch with audio out.
golem said:
Wait for something in your price range with Atmos support.
Click to expand...
The Onkyo has it, but apparently build quality might suck.
 
lostinblue said:
Yeah, that's the thing to avoid.

It virtually can't damage the receiver as it'll force shutdown before that happens but it's better if everything just cooperates.

I've mentioned it because selling 6 Ohm Receivers is common and in those cases the jump to 8 Ohm should be given or one could be in the market for a replacement in 2 years or so.yeah, no doubt, it's just the low price/quality solutions that won't.That's enlightening.

That means they're all incomplete implementations this year. And that sucks as none are really future proof. But I feel like it might also be a rewording of what we were already saying while throwing the 10.2 Gbps out there... Seeing it's a Pioneer guy talking he can't be called impartial even if he sounds pretty sane, so I'll try to apply a gain of salt.


Does the Onkyo passthrough implementation allow 18 Gbps? Because they clearly state "4K/60 Hz-Capable HDMI" if it didn't support 18 Gbps, 60 hz shouldn't be possible in 4K even at 4:2:0 and limited range, only 30 fps (or am I wrong?). If it's "processing it" as applying processing on top, that's a fair point to be sure and I can see that being internally limited to 10.2 gbps from the second passthrough is not enabled, but... passthrough is for sure the predef mode on most receivers so the absence of proper processing capabilities for 4K is not that bad as long as it passes it through with HDCP 2.2 - the opposite won't work which is trying to see a 4K bluray with full bandwisth but no HDCP 2.2.

Question is... will either of these even work? I still feel the Onkyo might have the best odds albeit only being able to act as a switch with audio out.The Onkyo has it, but apparently build quality might suck.
Click to expand...

They are indeed cramming 4k/60 4:2:0 over 10.2Gbps, this is how they updated (some of) the 2013 4k TV models and Kepler GPU's to 4k/60.
 
F8500 or GT60 ?


Panasonic has
-deeper blacks,
-more accurate colors
-lower latency

Samsung has
- brighter (which is good since it will be used in a room that is generally well lit, with a large window that can't be closed or obscured)
- gives me that precious extra inch (51").
- less prone to IR
- I also like the design better and i think it has a few more features ?

What worries me about the Samsung is input lag and i read somewhere that it can introduce some tearing (you have to change from 16:9 to fit screen or something). I also read about the "rename input to PC" trick, but someone said that PC mode has a washed out image with fewer settings you can tweak.

This is all a bit annoying since i can't even set different properties for different inputs; i only use one input and switch sources on the Marantz receiver (Xbox 360 - PS4 - Sky - Raspberry etc)

Sets are about the same price;.GT60 used to be cheaper, as low as 1199, but i can't find it anywhere below 1450 these days, Samsung is 1400€ which i guess is good since it's top of the line and it's often compared to VT60 series).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sony unveils next-gen RGB mini-LED TV Tech | "OLED Killer?"
2 3
118
9K
dave_d replied
  • Poll
hypothetical: 1080p 60hz OLED, or 4k 144hz LCD?
21
906
mèx replied
  • Poll
Switch 1 OLED or Switch 2 (LCD?) for a newcomer?
Poll Hardware  2 3
105
5K
Pandawan replied
Gaming TV that won't break the bank? Maybe an OLED?
43
3K
KungFucius replied
TFTCentral - Gen 4 LG.Display 2025 OLED Panels and Improvements
0
406
HeisenbergFX4 replied
Top Bottom