a new TV thread

[Vanraw]

Buying a new TV. 55inch area. Anyone have one of these ultra 4k, and is it work it?

OLEP look and sound great but not sure if they are worth twice the cost.

Been very happy with Samsung, but OLEP seems to be LG, and Sony and VIZIO seems to have nice products as well.

I'm replacing a Samsung DLP that has been great.

[Skelas]

4K is premature, at this point there is little media that is available in 4K. I'd wait on the 4K unless you find a great price. Vizio makes a nice TV, I don't really see a reason to spend more when the difference in quality is pretty hard to see, and this is coming from a Samsung owner. Take whatever you were going to spend on a Samsung, and then just purchase a bigger Vizio.

My 2 cents.

[Jakensama]

Listen to Skelas.. I got a 65 inch Vizio on sale for my living room, its great. Buying something that plays technology that aint in play yet isnt a good investment..

[Zirak]

I'm not sure on the build quality of Vizio. My first plasma was a Vizio and it was very nice - while it lasted. Fortunately it went out while still under warranty and I got a check with which to go buy a replacement. I went with Samsung and have been very pleased. We've been through a couple of Vizio's at work as well. I don't know if my experience with them is unusual or not but this seems to me to be a case of you get what you pay for - I just don't think Vizios last as long as other, more expensive units.

[Rallick]

I'm definitely a Samsung fan myself. 3 TV's (of various sizes) and they are all Samsung and have had no issues.

If you don't need a Smart model buy one that isn't.

[bonestomper]

because I am old and cheap, I kept a 37' Sony CRT television for more than 10 years. The second time it went out I bought the Hisense 55' at Walmart all set up to hook to the WiFi.

It has lots of features I have never used, but we did get Netflix.

the old TV weighed about 200lbs. This one weights about 50.

Now I need to update my audio equipment someday because the old Sherwood unit doesn't have digital sound just some kind of Dolby stuff.

for the money, bigger screen and picture quality I am quite pleased.

[Slamz]

I'm gonna be interested to see if 4k catches on. I feel like that's actually more resolution than most filmmakers would care to use. I feel like with Blu-Ray we saw the industry trying to catch up with set quality, makeup quality, lighting, etc -- stuff that looked okay in SD looked like 1960s Dr. Who in Blu-Ray.

4k is going to have the same problem. Something that wow'd you on Blu-Ray is going to reveal the fakery if released in higher resolution. I feel gamemakers will be loath to support it because if the extra processing power and art assets required to really take advantage of that level of detail. It would be like buying a 1900x1200 monitor back in 1991 -- tempting, but the ability to actually use that resolution is going to be limited, probably for quite a few more years.

[Jakensama]

God, I'm shuddering to think of how badly 4D porn would exageratte... imperfections in the actors.

[strife]

I'm gonna be interested to see if 4k catches on. I feel like that's actually more resolution than most filmmakers would care to use. I feel like with Blu-Ray we saw the industry trying to catch up with set quality, makeup quality, lighting, etc -- stuff that looked okay in SD looked like 1960s Dr. Who in Blu-Ray.

4k is going to have the same problem. Something that wow'd you on Blu-Ray is going to reveal the fakery if released in higher resolution. I feel gamemakers will be loath to support it because if the extra processing power and art assets required to really take advantage of that level of detail. It would be like buying a 1900x1200 monitor back in 1991 -- tempting, but the ability to actually use that resolution is going to be limited, probably for quite a few more years.

Not to mention the amount of bandwidth to provide regular programming in 4k. The whole net neutrality subject comes to mind when thinking about it(not to get political, but it's relevant).

[strife]

God, I'm shuddering to think of how badly 4D porn would exageratte... imperfections in the actors.

4D porn... would that provide touch or smell? I'm confused. Please let it be touch.

[Jakensama]

4th dimension is time, it goes back to when the porn stars were 18...

[Grieve]

I'm a movie junkie, and I'm pretty tempted to upgrade my projector to 4k. But the cheapest are still around $4k. I'll probably wait until they are closer to $1000, which is what I paid for my 1080p one about 5 years ago (and even then I'll still have to convince the wife..). I'm not sure it's worth it yet for a 55" TV, but I'd love to see how it looks on my 144" screen.

There's actually a fair amount of content, especially if you are a cord cutter. Amazon and Netflix both have a growing selection, and a little on YouTube. Probably put some strain on your broadband connection, though. I'm really hoping the new Apple streaming box being announced next month supports 4K, but right now sounds like it won't.

4k blu-ray is supposed to be out by the end of this year, but I haven't bought disks for years. Prefer to buy from Apple, so I (and extended family) can stream it from anywhere.

[Jakensama]

I'm sure apple will make one sooner or later that costs 3x as much as a normal one and locks you into their ecosystem.. But, hey, the build quality will be fantastic.

[Arsilon]

I'm sure apple will make one sooner or later that costs 3x as much as a normal one and locks you into their ecosystem.. But, hey, the build quality will be fantastic.

Don't forget the aesthetically pleasing corners.

[Grieve]

You guys are just bitter that you have to make do with second rate hardware.

[Vanraw]

I'm convinced on the 4k is a waste. Even went to Best buy and almost begged the guy to convince me of 4k. Then there was a basketball game on and the smoothing all the 4ks were doing to make up for the difference between 1080p and 2056, was a disaster. The screen all showing the pretty pics at 4k are great but the game was on normal broadcast. The upscaling was terrible even on the most expensive Samsung $5k tv.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/">http://www.cnet.com/news/why-ultra-hd-4 ... ll-stupid/</a><!-- m -->

So, hunting for LED 1080p. Ill let you guys know what I get.

[Slamz]

Yeah, where 4k might shine is going to be CGI movies of the future. CGI loves Blu-Ray and looks fantastic on it.

But who knows when or if that will be common-place enough to justify the purchase of a 4k TV (and a 4k disk player....and some 4k disks...)

This is interesting:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="https://help.netflix.com/en/node/13444">https://help.netflix.com/en/node/13444</a><!-- m -->

• Ultra HD streaming is available on Netflix!
  
  What do I need to stream Ultra HD?
  
  A TV compatible with Ultra HD streaming from Netflix. See below for more details.
  A plan that supports streaming in Ultra HD. You can check which plan you're currently on at <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.netflix.com/ChangePlan">http://www.netflix.com/ChangePlan</a><!-- m -->.
  A steady Internet connection speed of 25 megabits per second or higher. See below for more details.
  Streaming quality set to "High." More information about video quality settings can be found in our Playback Settings article.

I don't think you can get 4K on disc yet, which might actually make more sense.

[Breand]

As someone that works in the broadcast industry I can tell you that there is ZERO interest or movement towards 4k for broadcast television so don't expect that ever happening. We can't even get 1080i out the door without it looking like a pixelated mess.

You'd have to rely on other media for it. A 4k TV is an unrealized gimmick right now to sell TVs.

[Skelas]

I'm curious B, what technical issues stand in the way of 1080i? Is'nt it just a matter of purchasing 1080i cameras?

[Breand]

We do everything in 1080i, every channel is now mandated by the government to do so (some cheap ass channels will just upconvert to 1080i leaving the station, though). But then the cable company (or other provider) steps on it and compresses it for transport to homes. They need to squeeze all of those channels into a limited amount of bandwidth. So instead of making the pipe bigger, providers compress the signal because it is the much cheaper option. And as providers have increased bandwidth over time, instead of making the channels look better they instead say "fuck it, lets add MORE channels!" So even though bandwidth and compression tech have improved, they still just jam as much as possible into the pipe as they can.

So you may be watching a movie on HBO in 1080i, but it still looks compressed (especially black areas) because the provider is stepping on it. Compare a movie you watch on HBO through a provider, and then watch the same movie on Blu Ray. Blu Ray will look a lot better. Yet they are both 1080 (granted cable is 1080i and bluray is 1080p but that's not much of a difference at all)We are a high end graphics channel that looks beautiful leaving our facility, and it looks like crap on my TV set at home.

What providers will do is give priority to live sport events that are guaranteed to have eyeballs on them. So say for the Superbowl, they will send it uncompressed and step all the other channels down. Most will generally not step down the major networks and ESPN.

But it's all about bandwidth at the end of the day. Maybe...maybe I think within the next 5-10 years there is going to be an implosion in the content market and cable/satellite are going to finally stop paying the content creators money per subscriber and you'll see all of those useless channels no one watches disappear. And then there will be less need for compression. But I'm sure they'll figure out a way to throw something else in there. How about the death of consoles and you play high end video games through the bandwidth provider?

[Slamz]

And if we're talking about over-the-air broadcasts ("Channel 4") I think the problem is one of available bandwidth at a given frequency, especially since stations started broadcasting subchannels.

[Skelas]

does satellite have bandwidth issues, or is it pretty much limitless? There's no cables to run so you'd think it would be a pretty massive data pipe.

[Grieve]

Streaming will drive 4k adoption, not broadcast. I don't think broadcast will even be around in any meaningful way in 10 years. It's just a case of getting the internet pipes upgraded fast enough.

Netflix actually needs about 16 Mbps for 4k, but you need closer to 20 for a steady steam. We get about 40-50, and a decent amount of US homes get at least 15. HEVC encoding replacing H.264 should lower the threshold you need, and all the gigabit internet upgrades going on with Google Fiber and other companies should help.

Streaming just makes so much more sense than broadcast. Everything stored in the cloud, available from any device, anywhere, no need to screw around with DVRs and so on. And certainly no need to have blu-rays that get scratched, dirty, lost, etc.

Incidentally, the government (FCC)'s National Broadband Plan has a goal of 100 million homes with download speeds of at least 50 Mbps by the end of this year, and 100Mbps by 2020...

[Jakensama]

does satellite have bandwidth issues, or is it pretty much limitless? There's no cables to run so you'd think it would be a pretty massive data pipe.

Satellite providers generally limit your monthly Bandwidth. Dishnet has 15 mbps download speed but caps you at 30 gigs a month, they are the most generous.

Oops, you downloaded one game? No more internet for you! Of course, the solution to this problem is to move to fucking civilization.

[Skelas]

I'm thinking more along the lines of directv and dishnetwork. Do they have bandwidth issues, and as such compress like a cable company would need to? How is a satellite signal limited in bandwidth?