It's already in the cons, thanks.Good review. One more con is the price tag which is £1,000 extra
Is it me just being cynical but should the out the box not look better at the brighter end, especially on a £2k plus tv?
Android Oreo works a lot better the previous versions. It used to crash quite often, it's more of a rare occurrence now. You could wait up to 30 seconds before a button response before, now no more than 3. So it's still not the best TV OS but 100% better than any previous version.Good review, and it's nice to hear Android TV is no longer as bad on Sony tvs as it has been in the past. I'm honestly struggling to see why you'd pay the extra £££ for this over an LG or Panasonic OLED, though.
After my shootout experience, if I bought an OLED (which before the shootout I wouldn't have considered) then I would probably be looking at Panasonic g950 or if I somehow came into some cash the the gz2000 because of the Pro panel. But as it is, I will just wait until the end of the year and see what TCL does.Good review, and it's nice to hear Android TV is no longer as bad on Sony tvs as it has been in the past. I'm honestly struggling to see why you'd pay the extra £££ for this over an LG or Panasonic OLED, though.
It applies to all models this year, but more so as we move through the year towards CES 2020 when (I am assuming) many manufacturers will add at least 1 hdmi2.1 port to their TV's.Excuse my ignorance but why is not having HDMI 2.1 bad, when you got HDMI 2.3 ? Surely it's backwards compatible ?
Understood. Thanks for that.It applies to all models this year, but more so as we move through the year towards CES 2020 when (I am assuming) many manufacturers will add at least 1 hdmi2.1 port to their TV's.
New games consoles (Xbox Scarlett/PS5) should arrive Q3-Q4 next year and will have hdmi2.1 onboard. While 2.0b can have some of the features VRR/eArc/ALLM/ I don't think any current manufacturer supports them all (bar LG who brought 2.1 this year which also includes QMS).
BTW, don't be confusing HDMI 2.0/2.1 with HDCP 2.3 (copy protection)
Another great video review btw Phil !
I never wanted an Android TV OS in the first place, but the reviews of my TV sold me on the picture quality. So once I set it up I tried not to use the OS very often because of how poor it was.Extract from review -
'Finally, looking at the user interface, the Android TV system is now stable and fast with a nice spread of apps'
Well this is the biggest improvement that you would notice in day to day use. There is no way I will look at a Sony tv unless the OS is well sorted. I don't mind even if the OS looks outdated to some extent. The main thing the OS needs to be is easy to use and stable.
The OS was perfectly good in the AF9 last year tooExtract from review -
'Finally, looking at the user interface, the Android TV system is now stable and fast with a nice spread of apps'
Well this is the biggest improvement that you would notice in day to day use. There is no way I will look at a Sony tv unless the OS is well sorted. I don't mind even if the OS looks outdated to some extent. The main thing the OS needs to be is easy to use and stable.
Makes sense but not alway the case. Android Oreo now runs great whereas the previous version ran like a dog. Same TV different result.Hi Phil, When you say Android TV OS is now smooth and stable, did you mean on this TV in particular or in general?
I have found android runs only as good as the processing behind it, did you find any differences in Smart processing under the hood of this AG9 and the other androids that have been poorly reviewed before this?
OK. The important number is the DeltaE error. If this is under 3 it is most likely that you will see no issue with actual content. The result just stepped out of that threshold which for a consumer TV is still an excellent result, why? Because I could sit you in front of that TV and flick between this and the calibrated results and chances are you wouldn't see any difference at all. This is covered in the review. It is something we will have to cover in a tutorial as I also see people playing with AutoCal and worrying themselves over a 0.4 difference in DeltaE when it is already invisible to the human eye. Forget good looking graphs, they are for pros to sell you a calibration and show you something nice on a plotted graph. They have their place in presenting important data, but it is important to also realise the ability of the eye in seeing any such error on average.
No problem with your argument at all. As this was retail set how do we know that another is just not that bit more off beam, or possibly a lot more on beam, and will have noticeable effects. On the contrary one could argue that a set that produces a bang on graph could just perchance be a one off. So really Joe punter is still taking a gamble. Is it not possible for manufacturers to get a more consistent result.