Jump to content
BANGKOK
Sign in to follow this  
SymS

4K TV and AV Receiver Purchase

Recommended Posts

SymS let me know what you think of the 636, i was thinking of getting one too. Thanks.

I'm still waiting for the speakers. It's my first AV receiver, and I'll only connect 4 speakers, so I'm not sure I'm the best one to give an opinion. But I'll try after I play with it. I'll actually write a getting started on my Blog.

There are plenty of user's feedbacks on Amazon or Newegg. The main complain is that the HDMI board may break after two years or so, which is why I would not have bought it without 3-year warranty (First I looked at TX-NR626 on Lazada: No warranty). Some people may also have problems with Bluetooth or Wi-Fi (Can't remember for sure, I've read too many things about different AV receivers recently :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any word on whether the 636 is going to be firmware upgradable to support DTS:X when it releases in March?

I had never heard about DTS:X before, but it looks like it has been announced right at the end of December. So it's all very new.

I guess the answer is no. https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153518369639689&reply_comment_id=10153535923779689&total_comments=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What content is available for 4k?

YouTube and Netflix support 4K, but I guess it's not realistic with the bandwidth available, and for YouTube it relies on uploaders shooting 4K videos.

It can be useful if you have a 4K capable video camera, or smartphone (e.g. Nexus 6).

Going through photos on a 4K TV should also look better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What content is available for 4k?

YouTube and Netflix support 4K, but I guess it's not realistic with the bandwidth available, and for YouTube it relies on uploaders shooting 4K videos.

It can be useful if you have a 4K capable video camera, or smartphone (e.g. Nexus 6).

Going through photos on a 4K TV should also look better.

Youtube 4K only takes around 10mbps, and streams reasonably well in TH. The problem is it's highly compressed, and you soon tire of watching nature scenes and the couple of 4K movie trailers out there - which is all that's really available.

Netflix 4K requires around 15mbps, and on my (pretty solid) 20mbps connect is just not workable, at all. Even then, they only have two proper titles available (House of Cards and Breaking Bad). It's also noticeably compressed, but better PQ than YT.

Both of them look better than their 1080P (also compressed) streaming counterparts, but struggle to beat upscaled Blu-ray Picture Quality, IMHO. On top of that, Blu-ray absolutely annihilates all online streaming when it comes to sound quality... A DTS-HD MA lossless audio stream uses on average 15mbps on it's own (and up to 24.5mbps) - so we can all forget about getting good audio online for a long, long time...

4K Blu-rays are promised to be here by the end of this year though, and Panasonic showed a pre-production device @ the CES earlier this month - that's what's going to make all the difference...

Until then, the best way to take advantage of the extra pixels will be using the TV as a PC display, and upscaling high quality Blu-ray 1080P content.

Edited by IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or wait until prices come down and some content is readily available. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or wait until prices come down and some content is readily available. Lol

Absolutely!

However, prices are already dropping fast, so if you're in a position where you just need to buy a new TV, it's definitely worth at least looking at 4K options/prices. The other point is, once all manufacturers have cleared their 2014 stock / released their 2015 stock, what you'll find is that all the PQ tech will be going into 4K sets only - 1080P sets will become cheaper, and worse looking than they currently are, comparatively.

i.e. If you're shopping for mid-high end TV during this year, you'll be practically forced to buy a 4K screen, because they will be the only ones with the latest PQ wizadry - just like what happened to "HD" TV's once "Full HD" became mainstream. All the arguments about seating distance vs resolution will also become moot then too, because 4K will just look better, regardless of the extra pixels and whether or not you can see them ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO that was my thinking, i wanted a 65 inch TV this year so why pay 70,000 for a 1080p when i can get a 4k for 82,000.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What content is available for 4k?

YouTube and Netflix support 4K, but I guess it's not realistic with the bandwidth available, and for YouTube it relies on uploaders shooting 4K videos.

It can be useful if you have a 4K capable video camera, or smartphone (e.g. Nexus 6).

Going through photos on a 4K TV should also look better.

Youtube 4K only takes around 10mbps, and streams reasonably well in TH. The problem is it's highly compressed, and you soon tire of watching nature scenes and the couple of 4K movie trailers out there - which is all that's really available.

Netflix 4K requires around 15mbps, and on my (pretty solid) 20mbps connect is just not workable, at all. Even then, they only have two proper titles available (House of Cards and Breaking Bad). It's also noticeably compressed, but better PQ than YT.

Both of them look better than their 1080P (also compressed) streaming counterparts, but struggle to beat upscaled Blu-ray Picture Quality, IMHO. On top of that, Blu-ray absolutely annihilates all online streaming when it comes to sound quality... A DTS-HD MA lossless audio stream uses on average 15mbps on it's own (and up to 24.5mbps) - so we can all forget about getting good audio online for a long, long time...

4K Blu-rays are promised to be here by the end of this year though, and Panasonic showed a pre-production device @ the CES earlier this month - that's what's going to make all the difference...

Until then, the best way to take advantage of the extra pixels will be using the TV as a PC display, and upscaling high quality Blu-ray 1080P content.

So buy the time that you're able to view the content available for your 4K tv in Thailand, 20K tv's will be all over the place biggrin.png

I have 1080P tv's at my place, and when I have a visitor he will say that's a good picture. On which I'll reply, yeah they are 4K, and the visitor will say yes you can see that.

I actually don't lie, because I mean they are 4K Baht worth now.laugh.png

Edited by Anthony5
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What content is available for 4k?

YouTube and Netflix support 4K, but I guess it's not realistic with the bandwidth available, and for YouTube it relies on uploaders shooting 4K videos.

It can be useful if you have a 4K capable video camera, or smartphone (e.g. Nexus 6).

Going through photos on a 4K TV should also look better.

Youtube 4K only takes around 10mbps, and streams reasonably well in TH. The problem is it's highly compressed, and you soon tire of watching nature scenes and the couple of 4K movie trailers out there - which is all that's really available.

Netflix 4K requires around 15mbps, and on my (pretty solid) 20mbps connect is just not workable, at all. Even then, they only have two proper titles available (House of Cards and Breaking Bad). It's also noticeably compressed, but better PQ than YT.

Both of them look better than their 1080P (also compressed) streaming counterparts, but struggle to beat upscaled Blu-ray Picture Quality, IMHO. On top of that, Blu-ray absolutely annihilates all online streaming when it comes to sound quality... A DTS-HD MA lossless audio stream uses on average 15mbps on it's own (and up to 24.5mbps) - so we can all forget about getting good audio online for a long, long time...

4K Blu-rays are promised to be here by the end of this year though, and Panasonic showed a pre-production device @ the CES earlier this month - that's what's going to make all the difference...

Until then, the best way to take advantage of the extra pixels will be using the TV as a PC display, and upscaling high quality Blu-ray 1080P content.

So buy the time that you're able to view the content available for your 4K tv in Thailand, 20K tv's will be all over the place biggrin.png

I have 1080P tv's at my place, and when I have a visitor he will say that's a good picture. On which I'll reply, yeah they are 4K, and the visitor will say yes you can see that.

I actually don't lie, because I mean they are 4K Baht worth now.laugh.png

hehehe

But think about the person currently looking for say, a 48-50" TV. Options are, spend around 13K Baht of the cheapest, no-name Chinese 1080P panel, 17- 20K Baht for a low-end name brand 1080P panel, 22-30K for a mid-range 1080P panel, and anywhere from 35K and up for a high-end 1080P panel (while you can still find one).

A mid-range 49" 4K IPS panel can now be had for 26K Baht, putting them in the exact same price range as it's respective 1080P counterparts - and forgetting the extra dots, it also has an IPS screen with local dimming - two things which improve PQ regardless of source - which it's same-price 1080P competition are unlikely to have.

1080P is already being relegated to the ranks of low-end-only picture quality tech.

I'm not saying it's the time to buy, no way - prices will drop, but if you're in a position where you need to buy, as prices drop your pain will be a little less, if at least you bought something with a little longer shelf life wink.png

If you're only interested in low-end TV's, you're probably reading the wrong thread :P

Edited by IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYR. I've taken a few pictures for 42UB820T, and written a review: http://www.cnx-software.com/2015/01/24/lg-42ub820t-4k-uhd-tv-review/

Nice review smile.png

Just a couple of things to add:

the UB850T series has an onboard H.265/HEVC decoder capable of 60FPS - the UB820T and UB830T's HEVC decoder can only manage 30FPS. Not that it's a big issue really - we're a long, long way away from 4K streaming @ 60FPS, and the only real use-cases for 60FPS 4K are going to be live sports and gaming - the former which we won't see for such a long time it's not even worth thinking about, the latter which doesn't need HEVC...

I've seen that seating distance guide you published before, and I call BS on it. According to that, on my 65" Panasonic VT plasma, I can't see the difference between 720P and 1080P content at my normal seating distance of 4.5M (14.75 foot), which is complete and utter rubbish - I can clearly tell the difference between 1080i and 1080P at the sofa.. It also suggests that at 5.5M or so, I can't tell the difference between SD and anything with a HD label, which is just outright laughable - that difference is noticeable even from 10M (right at the back of the room).

Edited by IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen that seating distance guide you published before, and I call BS on it. According to that, on my 65" Panasonic VT plasma, I can't see the difference between 720P and 1080P content at my normal seating distance of 4.5M (14.75 foot), which is complete and utter rubbish - I can clearly tell the difference between 1080i and 1080P at the sofa.. It also suggests that at 5.5M or so, I can't tell the difference between SD and anything with a HD label, which is just outright laughable - that difference is noticeable even from 10M (right at the back of the room).

Further to this, I just did some testing on 1080P vs 4K on my set, using Big Buck Bunny files I found from your blog (thanks).

Setup is:

2014 Macbook Pro Retina 15"

LG 49UB820T

Seating distance: 3.2M (10.5 feet)

1080P video output at 1080P by the macbook, then upscaled by the TV looks about 85-90% as good as the actual 4K stream. Looking at the actual 4K version, even at 3,2M distance the picture is noticeably crisper - but admittedly only on selected scenes - some of them are so soft in rendering there's just no visible difference. The best scene I found was when the squirrel(?) was flying, and looking down at the bunny - that really clearly showed the difference between the formats.

1080P upscaled by VLC and output at 2160P by the macbook pro, looks at best around 65-70% as good as raw 4K. It's very noticeably softer all round, and clearly not as good as letting the TV do the upscaling, no matter what the scene.

OK, not very scientific testing, but my eyes don't lie - it's not a case of straining to see the difference, it's just clear. That seating distance chart, which almost seems to be taken as gospel online, is just plain wrong IMHO - according to it, at 10.5 feet with a 48.5" screen, I can't see any difference between 720P and any higher res - it's just plain hogwash.

Note: I do not profess to have fantastic eyesight or anything like that (I do have a good pair of ears though tongue.png ) - I'm now in my early 40's and already finding myself holding my cereal box a little further away in order to read the fine print sad.png

@OP: I'm curious if your findings are similar?

Oh yeah, one other thing about these UB820T's - the wall mount holes are almost directly in line with the power cord socket on the set, so you really need to be careful about the wall mounting kit used - generic style kits which work from say 30" - 60" will very likely block the power socket! I had to buy another, smaller kit, just for this TV sad.png

Edited by IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen that seating distance guide you published before, and I call BS on it. According to that, on my 65" Panasonic VT plasma, I can't see the difference between 720P and 1080P content at my normal seating distance of 4.5M (14.75 foot), which is complete and utter rubbish - I can clearly tell the difference between 1080i and 1080P at the sofa.. It also suggests that at 5.5M or so, I can't tell the difference between SD and anything with a HD label, which is just outright laughable - that difference is noticeable even from 10M (right at the back of the room).

Further to this, I just did some testing on 1080P vs 4K on my set, using Big Buck Bunny files I found from your blog (thanks).

Setup is:

2014 Macbook Pro Retina 15"

LG 49UB820T

Seating distance: 3.2M (10.5 feet)

1080P video output at 1080P by the macbook, then upscaled by the TV looks about 85-90% as good as the actual 4K stream. Looking at the actual 4K version, even at 3,2M distance the picture is noticeably crisper - but admittedly only on selected scenes - some of them are so soft in rendering there's just no visible difference. The best scene I found was when the squirrel(?) was flying, and looking down at the bunny - that really clearly showed the difference between the formats.

1080P upscaled by VLC and output at 2160P by the macbook pro, looks at best around 65-70% as good as raw 4K. It's very noticeably softer all round, and clearly not as good as letting the TV do the upscaling, no matter what the scene.

OK, not very scientific testing, but my eyes don't lie - it's not a case of straining to see the difference, it's just clear. That seating distance chart, which almost seems to be taken as gospel online, is just plain wrong IMHO - according to it, at 10.5 feet with a 48.5" screen, I can't see any difference between 720P and any higher res - it's just plain hogwash.

Note: I do not profess to have fantastic eyesight or anything like that (I do have a good pair of ears though tongue.png ) - I'm now in my early 40's and already finding myself holding my cereal box a little further away in order to read the fine print sad.png

@OP: I'm curious if your findings are similar?

Oh yeah, one other thing about these UB820T's - the wall mount holes are almost directly in line with the power cord socket on the set, so you really need to be careful about the wall mounting kit used - generic style kits which work from say 30" - 60" will very likely block the power socket! I had to buy another, smaller kit, just for this TV sad.png

Thanks for testing. I have not tried testing distance yet. The conversion method or device used to scale from 2160p to 1080p may affect the video quality, maybe I'll try to convert the 4K video to 1080p with high quality settings, instead of just using 1080p and 2160p videos. I'll also try to find an alternative distance / size chart.

Have you tried to use the TV as a computer monitor when connected to your Macbook Pro Retina 15"? Some people have asked me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen that seating distance guide you published before, and I call BS on it. According to that, on my 65" Panasonic VT plasma, I can't see the difference between 720P and 1080P content at my normal seating distance of 4.5M (14.75 foot), which is complete and utter rubbish - I can clearly tell the difference between 1080i and 1080P at the sofa.. It also suggests that at 5.5M or so, I can't tell the difference between SD and anything with a HD label, which is just outright laughable - that difference is noticeable even from 10M (right at the back of the room).

Further to this, I just did some testing on 1080P vs 4K on my set, using Big Buck Bunny files I found from your blog (thanks).

Setup is:

2014 Macbook Pro Retina 15"

LG 49UB820T

Seating distance: 3.2M (10.5 feet)

1080P video output at 1080P by the macbook, then upscaled by the TV looks about 85-90% as good as the actual 4K stream. Looking at the actual 4K version, even at 3,2M distance the picture is noticeably crisper - but admittedly only on selected scenes - some of them are so soft in rendering there's just no visible difference. The best scene I found was when the squirrel(?) was flying, and looking down at the bunny - that really clearly showed the difference between the formats.

1080P upscaled by VLC and output at 2160P by the macbook pro, looks at best around 65-70% as good as raw 4K. It's very noticeably softer all round, and clearly not as good as letting the TV do the upscaling, no matter what the scene.

OK, not very scientific testing, but my eyes don't lie - it's not a case of straining to see the difference, it's just clear. That seating distance chart, which almost seems to be taken as gospel online, is just plain wrong IMHO - according to it, at 10.5 feet with a 48.5" screen, I can't see any difference between 720P and any higher res - it's just plain hogwash.

Note: I do not profess to have fantastic eyesight or anything like that (I do have a good pair of ears though tongue.png ) - I'm now in my early 40's and already finding myself holding my cereal box a little further away in order to read the fine print sad.png

@OP: I'm curious if your findings are similar?

Oh yeah, one other thing about these UB820T's - the wall mount holes are almost directly in line with the power cord socket on the set, so you really need to be careful about the wall mounting kit used - generic style kits which work from say 30" - 60" will very likely block the power socket! I had to buy another, smaller kit, just for this TV sad.png

Thanks for testing. I have not tried testing distance yet. The conversion method or device used to scale from 2160p to 1080p may affect the video quality, maybe I'll try to convert the 4K video to 1080p with high quality settings, instead of just using 1080p and 2160p videos. I'll also try to find an alternative distance / size chart.

Have you tried to use the TV as a computer monitor when connected to your Macbook Pro Retina 15"? Some people have asked me.

Let's say you were to create a super-high bitrate 1080P video from the 4K source, is that really indicative of real-world 1080P vs 4K content though?

On that front, streaming 4K from Netflix (yes, it's very painful watching something in chunks of a few seconds each as it buffers) only looks very marginally better (like single digit %'s), and only at some times, to 1080P blu-rays upscaled by the TV - I haven't yet however had the chance to A/B test the exact same content - so that's just a general observation.

The Big Buck Bunny files are the best real test I've found yet - the 1080P version meets my blu-ray level PQ expectations, and the 4K version properly exceeds them, on some scenes. The shallow depth of field used on many scenes, and heavy antialiasing on details like grass, means that not all scenes are candidates for A/B comparisons though - that's nothing to do with the playback tech though, just the production.

As for using it as a monitor:

1) When sitting very close to the screen, in a position where you're "looking up" to see the top few pixels, you get an odd shadow effect:

post-163537-0-02300100-1422228582_thumb.

When looking down at the screen (or when sitting far away from it), this effect is no more:

post-163537-0-35125000-1422228567_thumb.

It appears as if the backlighting plane is about 2-3mm behind the actual LCD pane - and as you move your head there's a 3D 'parallax' effect going on at the edges. Note I have taken these photos to show the effect at maximum, and in OSX I really only notice it on the light gray menu bar at the top of the screen.

2) On my 2014 MBPr, the max. refresh rate is 30Hz/FPS, which is OK for desktop/web/video, but useless for games. It's not such a big deal, because the GeForce graphics card in it can't handle anything heavier than Angry Birds at these resolutions anyway. Nothing to do with the TV though.

3) I get noticeable mouse lag at 4K res. Not enough to stop you working I guess - it's a few ms at worst - but it's annoying. Again, nothing to do with the TV. Edit: I only get this when the MBPr is outputting both 4K over HDMI *and* 2880x1800 for it's own internal screen at the same time - shut off the internal screen and it goes away.

4) The desktop does become massive.... really massive. Sure the numbers tell you that anyway, but it still kind of hits you. Here's a photo using the "standard" web browser window size I use on my MBPr. Everything is super-readable on the TV, even at 1:1 without any display scaling though:

post-163537-0-98490000-1422228593_thumb.

Edited by IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...