So it had to happen - PLASMA now died

SPG

SPG

Soldato
Joined
28 Jul 2010
Posts
8,592
After far to many years of service the trusty Panasonic 50" TV (and heat source) has decided to die.

Have no idea on modern TVs apart from OLED is bad idea due to my own ineptitude of wandering off and forgetting it was left on (Read a few posts on this forum to convince its not for me).

So for the interesting bit, new TV is going on the wall, so 65" is too small anything from 75" to 85"

Budget max is 1.5k of course lower is better, Oh and i use HT-NT5 Soundbar with ARC capability, so if its a decent TV with crap sound it doesn't really matter. General all purpose viewing really.

Any ideas you wise folk ?
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Apr 2014
Posts
5,005
Location
Sunny Sussex
If you’re coming from a plasma, I don’t know if you’d be happy with any LED-backlit LCDs to be honest.

I’d go out and have a look at a load of them - it’ll give you more info than people posting on here.
 

SPG

SPG

Soldato
OP
Joined
28 Jul 2010
Posts
8,592
That`s a fair comment, Will take a trip down to Curry`s
 
Soldato
Joined
29 May 2010
Posts
6,013
Location
Cheshire
I understand the reasons not to go for OLED. I had similar concerns when it came time for a new TV. I had done the plasma thing a few years before and came a cropper because my wife is hard of hearing and needed to use subtitles. In roughly a year there was a nice maroon-coloured scorch mark in the footprint area where subtitles generally sat. This was despite me knowing how to set up a TV to minimise the risk of screen burn. If I had been gaming occasionally or these were onscreen logos then it wouldn't have been an issue.

In the fifteen or so years since I got rid of that TV I've had a succession of LCD-based TVs. It has been the safe choice, but all have been disappointing. My main bone of contention has been the trade-off between acceptable black levels and wide-ish viewing angles. It has always been a compromise. This is something that you never experienced with plasma. The picture looked just as good whether you sat directly opposite it or 20 degrees off centre. Not so with LCD; and they're all LCD regardless of the fancy monikers such as LED, NanoCell, QLED, mini-LED. They're just ways of illuminating the panel. It's backlighting.

LCD TV panels fall into two categories. There's IPS and VA.

IPS has the sort of wide viewing angles you've been used to with plasma. The colour saturation and contrast doesn't really change that much unless you're viewing from an extreme angle. The trade-off for this though is that the blacks look grey no matter how you adjust the set, and black backgrounds take on a patchy look (poor uniformity). These things contribute to a general lack of contrast.

VA is the inverse of this. Decent blacks, good uniformity (subject to the type of backlights; more on that later) but crap viewing angles. If I move a couple of seats to my right on this sofa then the picture looks pants for contrast and colour by comparison. I knew it would be like this when I bought the telly, but it still doesn't make it any easier to live with.

There are some other considerations with LCD-based TVs. The type and direction of the backlighting is important to he final result. The cheapest method is direct lighting. This is where the LED lights sit in strips directly behind the panel. That doesn't sound so bad until you realise that the lights are always on. They lack any ability to dim with changes in the picture content. Next up is the edge-lit panel. Here the lighting is usually a strip at the bottom edge that casts light across the back of the panel. Here you'll often find there's a dimming capability of sorts, but it's limited to working in columns. That's not ideal if you have say a shot of a bright full moon in the middle of a night sky.

The better solution is lighting behind the panel but that can then dim in zones, and the ore zones then the more controllable the lighting. This is called Full Array Local Dimming - FALD for short. This in turn led to the development of mini-LED, a new technology still finding its feet. In theory it should knock-for-six FALD and everything below it. In practice it's not that straightforward. Plasma and now OLED are the ultimate expressions of lighting control. When each pixel is individually addressable for light output it doesn't get any better than that.

I have made mention of lighting because it's an area where manufacturers cut corners, particularly as sets get bigger and there's more pressure on price. It's a little too easy to slip down a couple of levels in performance as you look at whatever the next size up happens to be, especially if the prices are fairly close.

OLED isn't right for everyone, but you do tend to find that it has all the things that make a TV a great TV.

The native refresh rate of the panel is often 100Hz rather than 50Hz, and that feeds in to better motion handling for clearing images when stuff gets busy onscreen. (There is an exception in the cheaper A series LGs which are 50Hz, but that's their only concession.) The panels are capable of displaying proper 10-bit colour without resorting to fudging it with 8+2 bit dithering. There's wide viewing angles with little in the way of colour or contrast loss, and the black level will make even plasma look 2nd best. Those black levels help give OLED its massive contrast ratios. You also get support of all the HDR formats including Dolby Vision and Dolby IQ.

I know you said you were looking for 75"; just be aware that even if you push your budget out to the maximum £1500 you're still looking at a fairly pedestrian LCD TV. A good example of that is the Samsung QE75Q80A (Rtings review link - UK price £1499 from RS). It's one of their QLED models. You get the 100Hz panel but not the 10-bit colour or DolbyVision support. Something else that's missing is proper local dimming. This is where you have to be really careful picking through the marketing B.S. that's designed to bamboozle you. Samsung refer to the backlight dimming as Supreme UHD Dimming, and it makes it sound like something special. If you read Samsung's marketing blurb about it they make a big play about how the system reads thousands of light points in the picture and then applies just the right level of dimming. What they're really doing is averaging and then applying one dimming level to the entire image. It's direct backlighting - the one I said was cheapest - but with average light level dimming applied. There are no individually dimmed zones, and not even the columns of dimming with edge lit local dimming. The only positives for me on this set are that it's bright (suits a brighter room) and the it has VRR mode support for gaming.

Now contrast with the 65" LG OLED65B16LA at at £1280 from Richers. Okay, it's a smaller screen, but far better quality. 100Hz, 10-bit, per pixel dimming, Dolby Vision and Dolby IQ, hughely better picture quality. Good motion. Game modes including VRR support. It doesn't have it all its own way though. LGs don't support DTS audio via Optical or a standard ARC connection. Also, being OLED means it's not as bright as an LCD TV so it suits rooms with some light control.

Which would I have - even considering subtitles? - the OLED
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
10,818
If you don't want OLED then you'll have to buy a 2nd hand plasma or repair your current plasma. Goodluck!
 

SPG

SPG

Soldato
OP
Joined
28 Jul 2010
Posts
8,592
Thanks all some sound advice, I will pay a visit to shed at the weekend to take a look. I think in truth it has to be OLED I was just trying to convince myself its a bad idea for the screen burn issues everyone is seeing.

As for LG my parents have one, no idea on model but the OS is woefully slow to react to a button press are they all like this ?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2003
Posts
3,032
Thanks all some sound advice, I will pay a visit to shed at the weekend to take a look. I think in truth it has to be OLED I was just trying to convince myself its a bad idea for the screen burn issues everyone is seeing.

As for LG my parents have one, no idea on model but the OS is woefully slow to react to a button press are they all like this ?


Just buy from John Lewis and add protect plus if you are worried. That will cover burnin protection.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Nov 2014
Posts
3,902
Location
The Cronx
I've got 2 LG OLEDS

1) B7 55" about 4 years old, main TV, youtube, streaming, normal TV no issues at all (except the TV guide is a little slow)
2) CX 48" a year old, used as a monitor so work from home 3 days a week now (previously 5) and lots of games no issues at all

I get the fear about an expensive screen but in my experience it's not something material.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
25,295
I think in truth it has to be OLED I was just trying to convince myself its a bad idea for the screen burn issues everyone is seeing.

Quite ironic really considering what the thread is about

Plasma had the exact same screen burn mongering that OLED now has.

I got my first plasma screen in 2003 and used it with my Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube back then. Never had issues.

They are making OLED monitors for PC's now, that's how confident they are about the technology.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jul 2010
Posts
22,776
Quite ironic really considering what the thread is about

Plasma had the exact same screen burn mongering that OLED now has.

I got my first plasma screen in 2003 and used it with my Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube back then. Never had issues.

They are making OLED monitors for PC's now, that's how confident they are about the technology.
Early OLED TV’s we’re highly susceptible to screen burn, that is undeniable. Modern screens are much, much better at resisting it now, so much so it’s really not an issue unless you leave sky news on 24/7 for weeks at a time.
 

SPG

SPG

Soldato
OP
Joined
28 Jul 2010
Posts
8,592
Ahh, I was under the impression it was much worse than PLASMA, if that's the case its not going to problem.

I do however think after some digging I need to increase my budget, No rush now the summer months are with us so will target a few and stick them on a price watch.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
25,295
Early OLED TV’s we’re highly susceptible to screen burn, that is undeniable. Modern screens are much, much better at resisting it now, so much so it’s really not an issue unless you leave sky news on 24/7 for weeks at a time.

More susceptible than now, but I wouldn't say "highly"

I had a 2016 B6 OLED. Used it for 3 years with PC, Xbox, PS4 and BBC news etc. No image retention.

Sold it to a mate, it's still going strong in his home.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Oct 2002
Posts
9,227
Location
Stockport / Manchester
Forget about the screen burn thing, it's not an issue anymore.

For a start, plasmas were FAR worse than OLED ever was. And the OLED technology has continued to improve and evolve.

Just go for an OLED. You'll be shocked just how poor your plasma was in comparison. They're that good.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Dec 2010
Posts
10,675
Ahh, I was under the impression it was much worse than PLASMA, if that's the case its not going to problem.

I was just reading this thread and wondering why you wouldn't buy OLED if you were happy with a Plasma TV.

And I think if you do go looking around, you will soon see that going OLED is really the only path coming from a Plasma TV.
 
Top Bottom