Forums

  1. Audio Visual & Home Theatre Equipment

    1. 35,797
      posts
    2. 295,120
      posts
    3. 271,072
      posts
    4. 83,460
      posts
    5. 210,967
      posts
    6. 87,696
      posts
    7. 47,550
      posts
    8. 16,183
      posts
    9. 3,293
      posts
  2. Video and Audio Content

    1. 244,548
      posts
    2. 92,806
      posts
    3. 79,874
      posts
    4. 1,069
      posts
    5. 3,501
      posts
  3. Transmission & Reception Issues

    1. 59,457
      posts
    2. 29,839
      posts
    3. 807
      posts
  4. Digital TV - in the news

    1. 10,039
      posts
    2. 1,939
      posts



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I dont make mistakes like that Owen, especially like the one in logic that you just made the comparison was with EXACTLY the same tele that had blown me away earlier, ... 2 weeks later, SAME tele, same relative "uncalibrated" mode now didnt quite look as impressive it wasnt two different teles, its a RELATIVE measurement and evaluation based on a cursory glance ... so what does that tell you ?      i never tried the double barrel blind test 10 foot down in a darkened well, i had seen enough to be happy with saving 4 grand ;-)
    • am i? i thought i was questioning your claim that it is the best 65" LCD you can buy in Ozz is the Panasonic DX900U. and provided the reasons why i didnt think it was. People read that here and assume you know what you are talking about and could even make a purchase based on that advice. I provided a couple of specs where it isnt exactly "the best" dont have to diss a product to dismiss it, and you dont have to interpret it as that either   its like AUDIs  may be the best performing, most reliable car on the planet, doesnt mean i HAVE to buy one. I may not like the Ipad superglued to the dashboard and think it looks stupid, others may love all that...that wouldnt be a "diss" but more of a dismiss
    • The problem with Samsung is in the pursuit of thin bezels and styling they have to ditch FALD.Your trying to diss Panasonic for building a TV that places picture quality over aesthetics and it seems kind of silly.It doesn't matter how much more "pop" the Samsung SUHD has over the other tv's in the showroom because once you dial back all those oversaturated colours and the brightness with calibration all you are left with are the flaws that stick out like dogs balls.
    • I have for sale a pair of Gloss Black Bowers & Wilkins CM10 S2 Floorstanding Speakers and a CM Centre 2 S2 also in Gloss Black in perfect as new condition. These speakers were purchased from a local dealer in March 2015 and in perfect working order. They are lucky to have seen 20 hrs of use in this time hence reason for sale.  Speakers are based in Newcastle, but I can meet a Sydney buyer half way as I can't freight as I don't have the original packaging. Paid $6000 for these and will sell for $3500 firm. (Grills removed for the purpose of pictures)  
    • Australian sport will be 50i, so 50 different images a second after deinterlacing. American sport as broadcast in America is 60i or 60p so 60 different images a second. These comments were made back in 2008 by a reviewer in the United States: The full article is at  http://www.cnet.com/au/news/counting-blurry-lines-should-cnet-test-for-motion-resolution-on-hdtvs/ I for one was not conscious of any noticeable lack of motion resolution last week when watching the nightly highlights coverage of the Rio Olympics supplied free to air on 7HD in MPEG-4 at 50i. Our set is a 65" 4K 2015 year Sony LCD TV that does not use frame blanking and which had motion interpolation at a default low setting. (This Sony set has a football mode. I've never experimented with it. I presume it would insert interpolated frames more aggressively.) There are many video artefacts I do notice, plasma screen flicker being one of them, but lack of motion resolution due to sample and hold is not something I can say I have ever noticed with sport. (I do sometimes notice a breakdown in resolution caused by lack of bitrate for encoding a scene that contains fast changes but that's an issue with the source material, not the display device.) Question: Who here is experiencing problems with motion resolution with a modern LCD set when watching sport? Anyone? How annoying is it?  What does the problem actually look like for your vision? How much better is the look after engaging aggressive frame interplolation? Of course a lot of the sport we get in Australia is in SD with MPEG2 encoding at not all that high a bitrate. Any lack of motion resolution would tend to get lost in the general blur of SD, I would think.