• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

LG 42SL9000 LED LCD HDTV Review

Tech News

News Supplying Robot
Reviewed by David Mackenzie
LG have delivered an LED-based LCD display that features all of their usual trademark strengths and weaknesses. The 42SL9000 features a wealth of image calibration controls which lead to absolutely superb greyscale and colour reproduction, good quality video processing, and an underwhelming black level which can rob some material of depth.
Read the full review...
 

Riffmeister9

Standard Member
Hi,

Thanks for interesting review!

I bought 47" SL9000 few days ago and I´m using it as a PC monitor which is receiving 4:4:4 full RGB from my Radeon 5770. Is this 4:4:4 full RGB different pixel resolution than the one you mentioned in your review?

I´m asking this because my previous TV could not handle this pixel resolution, but SL9000 seems to cope just fine with it.

Another thing is that I can´t spot any input lag with SL9000, but with the latest "high end" Samsungs it was very noticeable even to me. I´m not saying it´s not there but 49ms sounds strange...

Regards,
Riff
 

Aylon

Standard Member
Hi,

Thanks for interesting review!

I bought 47" SL9000 few days ago and I´m using it as a PC monitor which is receiving 4:4:4 full RGB from my Radeon 5770. Is this 4:4:4 full RGB different pixel resolution than the one you mentioned in your review?

I´m asking this because my previous TV could not handle this pixel resolution, but SL9000 seems to cope just fine with it.

Another thing is that I can´t spot any input lag with SL9000, but with the latest "high end" Samsungs it was very noticeable even to me. I´m not saying it´s not there but 49ms sounds strange...

Regards,
Riff

I am very interested in this comment. I was waiting ages, checking the website almost daily, waiting for the AVforums review. I could not decide on the sl8000 or the 9000. I game on the 360 and also stream my kids videos using a mac mini (also use it a PC for itunes and calendar). I was getting really excited about the praise being showered on the 9000 and thought my patience was worthwhile.

I can't say how gutted I was with the gaming performance stated, and the bluring of pixel images, and that the 8000 was far better on this.

Can you give anymore feedback on this point, or the reviewer come back on it.

I am wanting to get a 47" so your opinion gives me hope.

I found an authorative looking site saying that 17ms is about one frame, so this would mean 3 frames lag from the TV processing. I'm not sure I would notice much of this (my own reaction time is about 300ms), but would notice the lack of sharpness in PC mode.

Thanks <!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->
 
I bought 47" SL9000 few days ago and I´m using it as a PC monitor which is receiving 4:4:4 full RGB from my Radeon 5770. Is this 4:4:4 full RGB different pixel resolution than the one you mentioned in your review?

I´m asking this because my previous TV could not handle this pixel resolution, but SL9000 seems to cope just fine with it.
Hey there - are you sure it's actually 4:4:4 RGB, or is the video card just letting you select that option for output? On my own cards (several) I was given the choice of sending 4:4:4 to the TV, but the TV downgraded the signal before it hit the LCD panel.

Input lag depends on the individual. I know people with PC monitors that lag about 55ms (!!!) and they don't notice a thing. I'm very sensitive to it.
 

Aylon

Standard Member
Hey there - are you sure it's actually 4:4:4 RGB, or is the video card just letting you select that option for output? On my own cards (several) I was given the choice of sending 4:4:4 to the TV, but the TV downgraded the signal before it hit the LCD panel.

Input lag depends on the individual. I know people with PC monitors that lag about 55ms (!!!) and they don't notice a thing. I'm very sensitive to it.

Does it matter what cables are used to connect the games console? eg would HDMI produce lower lag than composite for example?

Thanks for a great review, though still gutted about the game/pc results.


If I can ask one more question, you said that games on the Samsung UE46B8000 where not enjoyable at 51ms, does 49ms on this make it a very poor choice also for this purpose?

This really could be the deal breaker for me, although Riffmeister9's comments and reply give me hope.


Save the SL9000 David Mackenzie, your its only hope!!!
 

unicus

Standard Member
Hey there - are you sure it's actually 4:4:4 RGB, or is the video card just letting you select that option for output? On my own cards (several) I was given the choice of sending 4:4:4 to the TV, but the TV downgraded the signal before it hit the LCD panel.

Input lag depends on the individual. I know people with PC monitors that lag about 55ms (!!!) and they don't notice a thing. I'm very sensitive to it.
I'd be interested to know how to test if the TV is downgrading 4:4:4.

I'd also like to know how you tested the lag and what the settings were because I have my 47SL9500 PC connection set to 'just scan' and I'm not getting that bad a lag.
 
Does it matter what cables are used to connect the games console? eg would HDMI produce lower lag than composite for example?
I only tested HDMI, but I'd imagine Composite would end up lagging more (if at all) because of the extra Deinterlacing and Comb Filtering processing (and Analogue to Digital conversion). HDMI *should* be the quickest option.

I'd be interested to know how to test if the TV is downgrading 4:4:4.

I'd also like to know how you tested the lag and what the settings were because I have my 47SL9500 PC connection set to 'just scan' and I'm not getting that bad a lag.
Easy way to check: go into Microsoft Paint (or similar), fill the screen with a blue background. Now draw a 1-pixel-thin Red line on top of the blue background. If it's full 4:4:4, the red line will be obviously defined. Otherwise you'll see that it's smudged.

For input lag, I run the TV beside a lagless monitor (laptops are usually good; I benchmarked my own against a CRT monitor to be sure) and make a small video recording of both screens running a stopwatch (go to :: Online Monitor test - Your free online TV and monitor test tool - By vanity.dk and flatpanels.dk). Pause the video and subtract the times to get the lag figure.
 

Aylon

Standard Member
I only tested HDMI, but I'd imagine Composite would end up lagging more (if at all) because of the extra Deinterlacing and Comb Filtering processing (and Analogue to Digital conversion). HDMI *should* be the quickest option.

Easy way to check: go into Microsoft Paint (or similar), fill the screen with a blue background. Now draw a 1-pixel-thin Red line on top of the blue background. If it's full 4:4:4, the red line will be obviously defined. Otherwise you'll see that it's smudged.

For input lag, I run the TV beside a lagless monitor (laptops are usually good; I benchmarked my own against a CRT monitor to be sure) and make a small video recording of both screens running a stopwatch (go to :: Online Monitor test - Your free online TV and monitor test tool - By vanity.dk and flatpanels.dk). Pause the video and subtract the times to get the lag figure.


From the point of view my wife doesn't care also long as she can watch Desperate Housewives etc. And I am getting slightly drawn to the LG 50PS8000, would a Plasma better suit me?

My current set is a six-year old Sony KF-42SX300U. So imagine anything would be an improvement.

Priorities:
Gaming (Xbox Live [COD series, FIFA footie, FORZA mainly])
Mainly SD TV (Have BT Vision and Sky+)
Streaming video using Mac mini as media centre.
Also using Mac as PC for itunes and ICal. (but have PCs and laptops for browsing and general PC stuff)

Also my room is fairly light, cream walls, white ceiling and no dark furniture of fittings. Although no natural light can shine directly on TV at anythime. (If this matters much)

Be thankful for any response.
 
From the point of view my wife doesn't care also long as she can watch Desperate Housewives etc. And I am getting slightly drawn to the LG 50PS8000, would a Plasma better suit me?

My current set is a six-year old Sony KF-42SX300U. So imagine anything would be an improvement.

Priorities:
Gaming (Xbox Live [COD series, FIFA footie, FORZA mainly])
Mainly SD TV (Have BT Vision and Sky+)
Streaming video using Mac mini as media centre.
Also using Mac as PC for itunes and ICal. (but have PCs and laptops for browsing and general PC stuff)

Also my room is fairly light, cream walls, white ceiling and no dark furniture of fittings. Although no natural light can shine directly on TV at anythime. (If this matters much)

Be thankful for any response.
I would always go for Plasma unless you have a specific reason to not do so (for example, sunlight shining on the screen, but you've just said this wouldn't be a problem).

So yes, I would look at Plasmas.
 

Mac slaine

Standard Member
Hi David
Thought you might be interested in this & comment.
Isol8 mains conditioner ( a bit long-sorry) improving a plasma/lcd display ?:confused:

The company says the new device, which sells for £189, will improve the picture and protect the display from mains spikes, while at the same time preventing noise from the display's power supply being fed back into the mains, where it can affect other equipment.
ISOL-8 says that while there is already interference on the mains when it comes into the home, the modern household has a lot of equipment able to further pollute the supply.
Dimmers, fridges and the like add local noise, radio devices – such as Wi-fi routers, Bluetooth units and baby alarms – add radiated noise, and power amps and AV receivers can also add power supply noise.
The company says that while the effects vary between displays, this noise "can affect the black-levels, actual picture noise levels, contrast, movement and more.
"1080p HD signals suffer the most, but even SD signals can be improved. Generally the larger the display, the better the visible results.
"Often these negative effects are not really noticed until they are removed, and removing them can be a revelation."
This is the high-end brand's first video product. It's said to "provide a clean, stable and noise-free mains supply to any video display, to improve picture quality and protect against damaging voltage spikes."
To this end it filters frequencies affecting HD and standard-definition video signals, and filters out the noise that display power supplies generate.
Performance claims extend to "reduced motion artefacts, improved contrast, more vivid colours, better image depth and a sharper, more focused and less grainy picture".
 
What bunk. There are so many technical inaccuracies in there, I don't even know where to start. The idea of a box making a real contrast improvement is laughable; the contrast is determined by the LCD panel itself which is an opto-electrical component.

Funnily enough, the companies making products like that have so far not sent one for scientific analysis.
 

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
Funnily enough, the companies making products like that have so far not sent one for scientific analysis.

And believe us we have offered to do objective measurement and analysis for companies with said types of products and we are still waiting on samples arriving many months later. Obviously we would do such testing in an independent manner and with an open mind as always. However the lack of samples arriving does tend to make you wonder why they are not jumping at the chance to back up the subjective marketing lines with some hard evidence. Not that we are implying they are talking rubbish of course, but maybe the fairy dust only works with believers so its pointless sending them to scientific types who will ask serious questions of their claims?
 
Last edited:

Mac slaine

Standard Member
Surely if any of this were true (& the cable debate) it would apply to the "good old days" of CRT sets with grainy noisy pictures & the ghosting effect alla 1970`s.Noise & signal strength were big problems where we lived in those days.

Forget 3D & lets go straight to holographic projection.I still want Princess Leia to appear in my room !:D
 

Aylon

Standard Member
I would always go for Plasma unless you have a specific reason to not do so (for example, sunlight shining on the screen, but you've just said this wouldn't be a problem).

So yes, I would look at Plasmas.


Just noticed I made a mistake. Thought my old TV had a consumption of 510 watts, but seems that it is only 210 watts (Sony KF-42sx3000). Can't find the user manual to check, but seems to be in a few places on the web, even on an old AVForum post. Wouldn't believe I check facts for a living:facepalm::suicide:

Means that the Panasonic TX-P4615 would be twice as juicey:nono:. Therefore the sl9000 47 inch might be right back in the frame.

Anybody got some knowledge on how much of a improvement the current TVs are over my agein Sony?

Thanks

Dave
 

Aylon

Standard Member
Sorry to ask here, but can anybody tell me what the realities of power consumption are. That is what figure should guide me?

Rated Power Consumption

or

On mode Average Power Consumption

There seems a big difference?

Thanks
 
Where are you reading the measured power figures?
They may be quoting the unwatchable "Dynamic" picture mode, which sucks up a lot of power. Once the TV is properly set up in the home (even if just the sensible "Movie" or "Cinema" mode is selected) then the power consumption will drop.

For what it's worth: the Pioneer plasma I have here usually sucks up about 300w when it's on, and that's a 50" one.
 

Aylon

Standard Member
Where are you reading the measured power figures?
They may be quoting the unwatchable "Dynamic" picture mode, which sucks up a lot of power. Once the TV is properly set up in the home (even if just the sensible "Movie" or "Cinema" mode is selected) then the power consumption will drop.

For what it's worth: the Pioneer plasma I have here usually sucks up about 300w when it's on, and that's a 50" one.

Thanks that does. I could live with a figure of around 300, and given most of my TV watching and game playing is in the evening I imagine I wouldn't need anything too bright
 

Klejton

Standard Member
Hi David.

I asked if I could have the calibrated settings a week ago. On my e-mail I got a reply to thread from Phil about a product how should to better things with the image. Maybe I dont understand this. I bought the 47" SL 9500 for a month ago and I´m satisfied, but as you reviewed the black level could be better. I´m just interested in the colour settings. I suppose each TV is individual and the settings depend on lots of things but it should be interesting to try it out. Is the settings something you save ?

regards
Stefan
 

brunom

Standard Member
Hi david,

Great review, indeed the mains faults are blacks and whites, and also missing PIP function!

Could you please post the optimal settings you found for the TV you tested?
I would like very much to try them on mine.

thanks in advance
Bruno
 

BigBoi1986

Standard Member
Hi everyone,
I have been searching on-line for the past couple of weeks for any know issues with the LG SL9500 having pixelation / blurring issues with no luck at all.

I Purchased the 42" model on Boxing day from Richer Sounds for £1,100 inc. 5 years Guarantee. This is my first HD TV and I must say I am really impressed with it overall. I was watching "I am Legend" on Blu-Ray and noticed that a that the characters outline became pixelated during fast moving scenes. I thought this was an issue with the disc so I tried all the Blu-Ray movies I had and found the same problem!

Last night I was watching a nature documentary on Sky and the pixelation was quiet bad when the animals were running. I have also noticed that it is really bad when an object or person moves across in front of "vertical lines" such as fences or gates?! I play my XBox 360 perfectly fine without any problems.

I went to Richer Sounds today and told them about the problem and they said I should bring it in and they will check it out. If any faults are found they will send it for repairs which will take 2 - 4 weeks. This is the only TV in the house and I don't want to live without TV for that long!

Does anyone know if the problem could be down to any kind of settings? Any input would be appreciated as I am a total newbie to AV technology!
:lease:
Thanks.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Guardians of the Galaxy Xmas Special, Strange World, Bones and All, and Cabinet of Dr Caligari in 4K
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom