Tellies 2023

[Sebastian Cobb]

Not that I can afford it right now but I've been pricing 4K tellies online. It seems like the cheapo ones aren't worth it because they generally have low brightness which apparently isn't great for HDR. A decent 50-55 inch with Dolby Vision would do me.

Dolby Vision is intriguing. I've been told it's basically per-frame metadata that gets sent to the TV that can dynamically tell it to tweak contrast, brightness, saturation etc. However this is most effective when your telly is set to some horrid over-zealous vibrant mode and the closer to a reference setup your tv is, the less you'd need it. Presumably the modern, 'reference standard' FILMMAKER mode that modern sets have make it redundant or ignore it.

[buzby]

This is going to sound odd but I'm aware oleds are seemingly quite fragile, how resistant are they to heat? I moved recently and had been putting off upgrading as I'd want a bigger screen but furniture to one side would've pushed everything off centre. Now my TV is in a South-facing bay window and I noticed the back can get quite hot on a sunny day. Not too bothered about the current set as it's about 12 years old and one of the older ones where the back is a ventilated metal cage with a fair bit of distance between the rest of the internals but would be more cautious with a brand new set.

My LG at an angle with the back south facing patio window and I've not noticed any problems. The ventilated rear cover is still just over an inch thick. I do usually close the blinds over when it's really hot though, just to keep the temperature down in the room (THe TV is rarely on during the day).

Some older LG OLED sets (and panels they supplied to Sony) have problems with the 'Green Blob' in the centre of the screen after about 2.5 years/4-5000 hours use, that is damage due to heat transfer from the driver board attached to the back of the panel, and the red LED pixels are the first to be affected by it. They have been replacing the panels uner warranty if the problem arises within 4 years of purchase, for the most part.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Ta!

I tried to find the hour usage in my Samsung by doing the magic button presses to get it into the engineering menu, I couldn't find it and all I seemingly managed to do was reset all the picture settings back to factory defaults, which of course I then had to punch back in per input and being an old set, they hadn't yet gotten stingy with those.

[Glebe]

Dolby Vision is intriguing. I've been told it's basically per-frame metadata that gets sent to the TV that can dynamically tell it to tweak contrast, brightness, saturation etc. However this is most effective when your telly is set to some horrid over-zealous vibrant mode and the closer to a reference setup your tv is, the less you'd need it. Presumably the modern, 'reference standard' FILMMAKER mode that modern sets have make it redundant or ignore it.

Of course the TV needs to have a decent picture in the first place, there are actually a lot of cheap models that offer DV but it prolly looks shite on them. It really seems like you have splash out a bit extra to get a half-decent 4K set, even at this stage.

[Mecha Rodney]

@Sebastian Cobb DV is certainly more valuable than something which fixes poorly set up images, it looks a little bit better than regular HDR or HDR10+ at my end. HDR in all its forms is complicated beyond my comprehension, though. I just know from experience that the actual panel is much more important than the HDR format.

[Glebe]

Some of the cheapo Chinese telly brands are supposedly decent but since they all seem to be owned by the Chinese government with their awful human rights record they can get tae fuck as far as I'm concerned (Phillips have also been criticised for dodgy practices apparently... I guess all big companies are dirty somehow).

Apparently at least 400 nits brightness is required for decent HDR performance.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I thought Philips have basically completely pulled out of consumer electronics.

[Glebe]

I thought Philips have basically completely pulled out of consumer electronics.

Hadn't heard that. Could be they sold their TV division to another company but Philips-branded TVs are still sold AFAICS.

To expand on the thing about dodgy practices, Philips are a Dutch company but I just read recently that apparently there were issues with working conditions in their China plant or summit.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I think you'll probably find that's the norm given most electronics companies use Chinese labour these days.

[Glebe]

I think you'll probably find that's the norm given most electronics companies use Chinese labour these days.

Hmmm, yeah, prolly.

[touchingcloth]

How much better are OLEDs than LCDs? It looks like the OLED tellies are about 3x the price of similar LCDs, but in brightly-lit showrooms it's essentially impossible to say how they compare in a dark living room, or with old DVDs, shitty torrented files, etc.

[beanheadmcginty]

I thought Philips have basically completely pulled out of consumer electronics.

Yeah, they concentrate on medical equipment these days. However, they licence the Philips consumer electronics brand to a Japanese firm called Funai, who stick the badge on their stuff.

[Sebastian Cobb]

Yeah, they concentrate on medical equipment these days. However, they licence the Philips consumer electronics brand to a Japanese firm called Funai, who stick the badge on their stuff.

I know that name but only because vwestlife has covered their rather cheap and plasticy vcr's from the end of the video era.

[Minami Minegishi]

TV AUDIO AND SOUNDBARS

So I have replaced my cat-smashed TV with another Samsung TV and it's reminded me that the sound on these things is dogshit.

I have had a look at prices for audio and it's eye-watering, particularly as I just shelled out for a new TV.

Are there any options for me that involve spending £200 max or is that naive? I've seen an LG and Phillips soundbar for less than that but I have no idea if they are any cop.

[buzby]

I thought Philips have basically completely pulled out of consumer electronics.

They have. In 2013 Philips sold their TV and monitor division and the rights to use the Philips brandname (outside the USA) to TPV Technology of Taiwan, whose factories are in mainland China.

They tried to sell the rest of their A/V division (video and audio media players) to Funai the same year, but the deal fell through.  It was renamed WOOX Innovations, and was eventually sold to Gibson Brands of Nashville (yes, that Gibson - they also own TEAC, Tascam, Onkyo and Stanton) in 2014, along with a licence to use the Philips name.

Yeah, they concentrate on medical equipment these days. However, they licence the Philips consumer electronics brand to a Japanese firm called Funai, who stick the badge on their stuff.

Funai have a licence to use the Philips name on TV and video products only in the USA, which predated the sale of Philips TV division to TPV Technology.  Funai and TPV aren't averse to suing each other. 

[buzby]

How much better are OLEDs than LCDs? It looks like the OLED tellies are about 3x the price of similar LCDs, but in brightly-lit showrooms it's essentially impossible to say how they compare in a dark living room, or with old DVDs, shitty torrented files, etc.

The biggest advantages OLED has over LCD is the black levels (on an LCD when a pixel is off there is still some leakage of the backlight through the liquid crystal, even with active backlight systems) and the pixel response time (which exhibits itself in fast panning or scrolling images). It really is like chalk and cheese.

In OLED displays, the LED pixels are responsibe for generating the light output, and as a result LCDs (because they have a backlight) usually have a higher maximum brightness, but unless you have cataracts that isn't much of an advantage.

[touchingcloth]

The biggest advantages OLED has over LCD is the black levels (on an LCD when a pixel is off there is still some leakage of the backlight through the liquid crystal, even with active backlight systems) and the pixel response time (which exhibits itself in fast panning or scrolling images). It really is like chalk and cheese.

In OLED displays, the LED pixels are responsibe for generating the light output, and as a result LCDs (because they have a backlight) usually have a higher maximum brightness, but unless you have cataracts that isn't much of an advantage.

Thanks, a dimmer telly is no bad thing as I dim my current one anyway.

Presumably dark areas on shitty compressed files render with less visible noise on OLED, as they look a grey, pixelly mess on LCD.

[steveh]

Presumably dark areas on shitty compressed files render with less visible noise on OLED, as they look a grey, pixelly mess on LCD.

Don't think the panel type will really affect that if the original encoding is poor. Some TVs will have better MPEG noise filters though that can minimise banding / posterisation, macroblocking and 'mosquito noise' / halo artifacts. Can be worth setting up different picture settings so for clean stuff you minimise the processing but for dodgier sources you ramp up the processing higher.

[Sebastian Cobb]

My parents Sony (not a particularly fancy one) seems to be much worse at showing artifacts in dark areas than my much older not particularly fancy Samsung. And I have that set to game mode to disable a lot of the post processing. I think their panel leaks light worse than mine and is LED rather than fluorescent.

Viewing angle might make a difference too, their tv is quite low, so you look down, mine's about eye level. I noticed it I say on the floor so the top is nearer eye level it looks less bad.

HEVC/x265 seems a lot better at not having these artifacts in the first place, even if the compression is of a similar rate (assuming the "it can result in roughly half the filesize of x264").

[touchingcloth]

Don't think the panel type will really affect that if the original encoding is poor. Some TVs will have better MPEG noise filters though that can minimise banding / posterisation, macroblocking and 'mosquito noise' / halo artifacts. Can be worth setting up different picture settings so for clean stuff you minimise the processing but for dodgier sources you ramp up the processing higher.

I think the only solution, then, is to try one at home and make sure we buy from a place that has a no quibbles returns policy.

I found this thread - https://forums.bit-tech.net/index.php?threads/oled-tv-permanently-broke-my-piracy-habit.376375/ - where the poster announces they are DONE with pirated media thanks to OLED showing compression artifacts more clearly, but that thread is from over 3 years ago now, and makes no mention of tweaking the noise filters. It also smacks of the video equivalent of audiophile nonsense, and one poster notes that

Nearly everything I watch on my OLED is ripped content in someway, Sky Q, Netflix, Amazon and youtube most streamed UHD and it all looks good to me, blacks and contrast is very good, I see no banding on good quality sources, have you disabled some processing?

...while another says that

I can't agree with you on your last point about increased video quality making the old stuff obsolete. It's a diminishing return, and there are already a fair few people who can't tell a SD broadcast from an HD one. To then try to make the jump from even a 1080p Freeview broadcast to a BluRay is a difficult sell, let alone going above that.

Unless there is a new leap in technology (full wraparound from a VR headset, perhaps?) the media we have is already at or above the threshold of most people's ability to discern.

...which is definitely the camp I'm in, as I don't particularly give a shit about blacks that are so deep I can fall into them or visuals so crisp they slice my eyeballs to pieces.

Given what we watch the most - old sitcoms from the video days, pirated films, streaming on a connection that's 10Mbps on a VERY good day - and that I have no plans to add a BluRay player along with the physical media and additional remote that that would entail, the real question is more whether I'd notice any difference at all versus an LCD telly, whether positive or negative.

Maybe I'll download that Moana rip the thread talks about and see how it looks on my telly before taking it on an external drive down to Tandy's and seeing if they'll let me try it out.

[buzby]

The real question is more whether I'd notice any difference at all versus an LCD telly, whether positive or negative.

Ignoring anything else about compression ratio or resolution, the biggest factor for me going to OLED was the response time. Ten or so years ago I went for plasma over LCD because I just couldn't stand the smearing on fast-moving images that happened with LCD. LCD did improve a bit in that aspect, but I hung on to my plasma as OLED technology had arrived and I was hoping it would get cheaper and more robust by the time my plasma kicked the bucket.

The screen filter started to delaminate shortly before LG announced they were going to start 42" panel production (I didn't want anything bigger than my current set), so I put up with the blotchy corner of the screen for about a year (6 months until the 42" models launched, then another 6 months for them to go below £1000).

[touchingcloth]

Ignoring anything else about compression ratio or resolution, the biggest factor for me going to OLED was the response time. Ten or so years ago I went for plasma over LCD because I just couldn't stand the smearing on fast-moving images that happened with LCD.

I mainly watch lawn bowling, so that's not a huge factor for me.

I put up with the blotchy corner of the screen for about a year (6 months until the 42" models launched, then another 6 months for them to go below £1000).

43"^* LGs are going for about 1,200€ here for OLED, and under 350€ for LCD. The 3.5x price difference stings a little, but it's not a terrible investment given a) what £350 would buy you 20 years ago and b) the fact that our cheap Samsung has lasted 12 years and is only slightly on the blink now (its brightness changes erratically but not dramatically, like a phone with an ambient light sensor that's been momentarily confused).

^*Larger than I'd ideally like, but that's the way of the world. 32" was the smallest I could easily and inexpensively find when I bought my Samsung all those years ago, and even that felt too big. I've done some rough calculations on this exponential change and it looks like when I'm in my retirement 80s and looking for a TV that's the smallest on offer but still larger than I'd ideally want it will be 220". On the downside it won't fit in even the largest room in my house, but on the plus side it will only cost 125€.

[Sebastian Cobb]

43"^* LGs are going for about 1,200€ here for OLED, and under 350€ for LCD. The 3.5x price difference stings a little, but it's not a terrible investment given a) what £350 would buy you 20 years ago and b) the fact that our cheap Samsung has lasted 12 years and is only slightly on the blink now (its brightness changes erratically but not dramatically, like a phone with an ambient light sensor that's been momentarily confused).

I have a Samsung of that age, I think there's a 'power saving' adaptive brightness setting that can be disabled.

However it does seem to have two brightness settings for the backlight, whereby it'll go on a 'low' half brightness if everything's dark enough and then ramp up if something bright comes on screen, you can see it change by looking at the vents on the back, in practice it only really does it on very dim scenes or where there's not much on the screen at all (e.g. credit sequences with dim lettering, or if the media player has dimmed on pause). You can also observe it if you have one of those metering plug things.

[touchingcloth]

I have a Samsung of that age, I think there's a 'power saving' adaptive brightness setting that can be disabled.

However it does seem to have two brightness settings for the backlight, whereby it'll go on a 'low' half brightness if everything's dark enough and then ramp up if something bright comes on screen, you can see it change by looking at the vents on the back, in practice it only really does it on very dim scenes or where there's not much on the screen at all (e.g. credit sequences with dim lettering, or if the media player has dimmed on pause). You can also observe it if you have one of those metering plug things.

Cheers, I'll take a look at that. It might be that it's always been there but that it's more noticeable since we've kept the telly at less than full brightness and have the lights in the room set to dim later in the evening.

Sick of these people making the choice for me of whether I want to save energy or not. I've recently bought my first personal (as opposed to shared with partner) MacBook and I'd forgotten that they do everything they can to make it difficult to stop the screen turning off and the laptop going into standby when running on battery, and they make it literally impossible to close the lid and have it carry on running when not connected to an external monitor or running third party software^*.

Hat tip to the MacBook stalwart utility Amphetamine, which is an incredible piece of free software. I'm sad that f.lux is now redundant given that macOS includes its own native equivalent now. RIP.

[Minami Minegishi]

I've just bought a Samsung and the main time setting it up was spent fucking around with picture issues related to auto settings and brightness.

There are so many functions to disable to get what I would consider a 'normal' picture.

The fact that TV companies think it is ok to default to smooth settings that make Tarkovsky films look like Shortland Street is a major, modern crime.

It breaks my heart that this is how people watch films.

[touchingcloth]

Tarkovsky films look like Shortland Street

What does this mean in technical terms? I'm not familiar with either thing, and now I'm worried if I have my telly set to "twat".

[Sebastian Cobb]

Motion interpolation, where a 24fps film gets its frame rate dragged up to 60 or 100ishfps and the telly is pulling most of the frames out of its arse

[touchingcloth]

Ah right, so everything looks like A Hobbit.

Would love to see how the Gladiator or Saving Private Ryan battle set pieces look in glorious video.

[touchingcloth]

That said, I bet it would be interesting to film something on a rig with a 24, 30, and 60fps camera, up- and down-rate them all so that there are 24 -> 30, 30 -> 24, etc. versions, and then to show people random actual and interpolated frames from each version.

My gut feeling is that people would be able to tell the 30fps versions whether actual or interpolated way easier than they could tell whether any given frame was genuine or not.

[Endicott]

TV AUDIO AND SOUNDBARS

So I have replaced my cat-smashed TV with another Samsung TV and it's reminded me that the sound on these things is dogshit.

I have had a look at prices for audio and it's eye-watering, particularly as I just shelled out for a new TV.

Are there any options for me that involve spending £200 max or is that naive? I've seen an LG and Phillips soundbar for less than that but I have no idea if they are any cop.

Never been an issue for me because I run the TV sound through my hi-fi and the speakers are either side of the TV.

But if I didn't have that option I'd get a close to 100 quid pair of computer speakers. Probably something by Creative, like the Gigaworks T20. Not an option for everyone as I imagine some people might not like computer speakers sitting either side of the TV.

I bought these for my mum, they do the job and don't look terrible. Unfortunately as far as I can tell, not made anymore.