Was going to buy an OLED, but...

kj01

Standard Member
I'm new here, but don't get me wrong, I'm not here to cause trouble: I think the standard of so-called HDTV has become absolutely lamentable of late.

Whatever the platform, absolutely awful - especially the Wimbledon tennis on BBC.

So, abandoned the whole idea - I'll stick with my 42" LG plasma. Very sad.
 

RayP

Well-known Member
I'm new here, but don't get me wrong, I'm not here to cause trouble: I think the standard of so-called HDTV has become absolutely lamentable of late.

Whatever the platform, absolutely awful - especially the Wimbledon tennis on BBC.

So, abandoned the whole idea - I'll stick with my 42" LG plasma. Very sad.
I don't know what TV you were looking at to come to that conclusion but I can tell you pictures of tennis (and every HD channel) are absolutely brilliant on my Loewe OLED. As someone who had a Panasonic plasma display until last November the upgrade is significant.
 

dave1956a

Well-known Member
I don't know what TV you were looking at to come to that conclusion but I can tell you pictures of tennis (and every HD channel) are absolutely brilliant on my Loewe OLED. As someone who had a Panasonic plasma display until last November the upgrade is significant.
+1 same on my LG 55 OLED it walks all over a Pana 50VT65 (even SWMBO can see how much better the oled is)
 

google

Distinguished Member
I'm new here, but don't get me wrong, I'm not here to cause trouble: I think the standard of so-called HDTV has become absolutely lamentable of late.

Whatever the platform, absolutely awful - especially the Wimbledon tennis on BBC.

So, abandoned the whole idea - I'll stick with my 42" LG plasma. Very sad.
What idea did you abandon? Were you going to go 65"? I think you would enjoy oled over the plasma.
 
Last edited:

GAmbrose

Well-known Member
I still have my 55VT50 in the bedroom and the difference in image quality between that and my 65B6 is night and day.

OLED is so good
 

RayP

Well-known Member
Buy the right OLED and it will do a great job of poorer quality transmissions. Worth the upgrade IMHO.
The quality of the Freeview picture on my admittedly expensive Loewe is outstanding. But only yesterday I found that switching to 1080i in my Sky Q box improves SD PQ no end and is far better than the lazy option of leaving it to 3840*2160 for all sources. HD broadcasts are slightly better too. Well worth the effort in switching only to 3840*2160 when you want to watch UHD.
 

Slugsy01

Well-known Member
I walked into Currys and they were showing tennis on the Sony OLED.

It looked AWFUL, loads of artefacts, lack of sharpness etc.

Do I think that it's because of the set or its an OLED? No, because Currys had set it up terribly and it looked like a non HD channel.

That set is a diamond as are many other OLED. No set will do well under those circumstances.

If I was buying a set now, OLED is easily the choice I would be making. Other than some minor quibbles about brightness in highlights with HDR, I'm not sure what else I would want.
 

kj01

Standard Member
Buy the right OLED and it will do a great job of poorer quality transmissions. Worth the upgrade IMHO.
That's the sort of advice I was hoping for. I'm thinking that the sort of stuff I want to watch will only be available in "HD" for some time to come, and anyway, Sky want another arm and a leg for Sky Q - enough is enough. With the sort of viewing distance envisaged, a decent quality HD picture should be quite adequate. Accent on "decent quality"...

It seems that HD is becoming the new SD, with ever-reducing bandwidth and ever-increasing compression (to make way for the bandwidth requirements of UHD channels). Well, that's the impression I'm getting.

So, which would be the "right" OLED TV? Being a cheapskate, I was toying with the idea of an LG 910v, but the 55B6 might be a better bet for the future...

(Many thanks for all the helpful replies, by the way...)
 

furryhobnob

Distinguished Member
That's the sort of advice I was hoping for. I'm thinking that the sort of stuff I want to watch will only be available in "HD" for some time to come, and anyway, Sky want another arm and a leg for Sky Q - enough is enough. With the sort of viewing distance envisaged, a decent quality HD picture should be quite adequate. Accent on "decent quality"...

It seems that HD is becoming the new SD, with ever-reducing bandwidth and ever-increasing compression (to make way for the bandwidth requirements of UHD channels). Well, that's the impression I'm getting.

So, which would be the "right" OLED TV? Being a cheapskate, I was toying with the idea of an LG 910v, but the 55B6 might be a better bet for the future...

(Many thanks for all the helpful replies, by the way...)
The 910 is only a 1080p oled with no hdr, although great not really future proofed, and for the same price as the b6 you can get a c6 that also has 3d that the b6 doesn't have, and a better chipset than the b6 also, my last TV before going for oleds was a Panasonic zt65 which was Panasonics best consumer plasma ever made, and oleds make that look like a poor TV, still own a Panasonic vt65 in the bedroom and the difference is night and day
 

HP Deskjet

Active Member
+1 same on my LG 55 OLED it walks all over a Pana 50VT65 (even SWMBO can see how much better the oled is)
I made the same move, only my VT50 was 55". I find my 55" LG E6 OLED far better, even when it comes to motion handling. The blacks are obviously better than those on my VT50. I can safely say that the LG 55" E6 OLED is the best television I've yet owned. I've watched a lot of Wimbledon on it this year and have had no complaints about the picture quality.
 
Last edited:

gbjbaanb

Member
Buy the right OLED and it will do a great job of poorer quality transmissions. Worth the upgrade IMHO.
OK, so which one is the right one? A sony? Panasonic? A LG even? Or a Philips or Loewe?

I don't expect SD broadcasts to look magically better because they're on an OLED (as I think many people do reading the comments that its not OLEDs fault SD is not 4k HDR), but I expect them to be easily watchable with no blockiness, upscaling artefacts, or motion problems.
 

RayP

Well-known Member
OK, so which one is the right one? A sony? Panasonic? A LG even? Or a Philips or Loewe?

I don't expect SD broadcasts to look magically better because they're on an OLED (as I think many people do reading the comments that its not OLEDs fault SD is not 4k HDR), but I expect them to be easily watchable with no blockiness, upscaling artefacts, or motion problems.
Buy a Loewe Bild 7. Okay, I know it's serious money but having had a 3 hour demo of it at ********'s pad last October I placed my order within 48 hours.

I thought Blu-ray was 4K it was that good. Even some Sky channels have seriously good PQ. I'm still able to watch DVDs on mine and not be irritated by the poor resolution. Yes of course it's only 720x576 but such are the upscaling qualities of the Loewe it makes all formats watchable. And Dolby Vision is superb.

And with Sky Q the SD quality can be improved by setting Sky to 1920x1080 for SD and HD content and only switching to 3840x2160 for UHD content. Bit fiddly I know but ask yourself what's going to upscale better? A Sky box or state-of-the-art TV?

Nine months on and I still feel no regrets about spending the money. You really do get what you pay for with Loewe.
 

Stitch

Active Member
OK, so which one is the right one? A sony? Panasonic? A LG even? Or a Philips or Loewe?

I don't expect SD broadcasts to look magically better because they're on an OLED (as I think many people do reading the comments that its not OLEDs fault SD is not 4k HDR), but I expect them to be easily watchable with no blockiness, upscaling artefacts, or motion problems.
I think the 2017 screens are all very capable. Personally, I have the Loewe Bild 7, but suggest you need to go see for yourself. Don't think you'll be disappointed with whichever one you decide on.
 

Off The Fence

Active Member
I think the 2017 screens are all very capable. Personally, I have the Loewe Bild 7, but suggest you need to go see for yourself. Don't think you'll be disappointed with whichever one you decide on.
I'd say if you've got the cash, go for a Bild 7 (as alledgedy they have cherry-picked panels and so you're less likely to get a bandy one...and owners banging on about how amazeballs they are at abso-flipping-lutely everything :p).

After that, if getting the most out of low quality /SD sources is a priority, I would go for a Sony or Panasonic (this is after lurking on the OLED forums for ages and finally setling on an A1 for mostly HD/broadcast viewing).
 

toodeep

Member
With respect what does the Bild7 give one that the newer cheaper Bild4/5 lacks, apart from a motorized stand?
 

RayP

Well-known Member
With respect what does the Bild7 give one that the newer cheaper Bild4/5 lacks, apart from a motorized stand?
The very best LG panels. Only available for the Bild 7. Hence the outstanding PQ.
 

RayP

Well-known Member
Would those be last year's panels or this year's? Are the Bild9's panels better still?
Both years. The 2016 panels of which mine is one has 3D capability. The 2017 ones don't.

Can't speak for the 9 as I don't have it.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Panasonic HZ2000 OLED TV Review: The best OLED for movie viewing in 2020

Latest News

McIntosh launches MX100 AV processor and MI347 power amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung updates and expands access to Samsung TV Plus
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Disney+ UK introduces GroupWatch co-viewing feature
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Netflix UK for November 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Harman Kardon launches Citation Amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom