Which 65" TV to get for under 1600 Euro?

koti

Member
I was convinced up untill yesterday that I want the Samsung UE65NU8042 (I can get it for 1125 Euro) I went to the store and looked at the Samsung QE65Q7FNA (listed for 1873 Euro at the mall) and I kinda lost interest in the UE65NU8042. I don't want to spend anything beyond 1.6K Euro (7K Polish) and I'm at a loss here. I will be switching from a Pioneer PDP436XDE 43" plasma which I still love but its only 720p and its too small for the new place we live in. I need to be able to use the new TV for Excel/Word for longer persiods of time (many hours) and not worry about burnt pixels. I successfuly used my Pioneer plasma in thoughtful ways to prevent pixel burn but I would prefer that a new TV would be less prone to damage due to prolonged still picture. I don't necessarily care about super cool features like HDR (or at least I think I don't care because I'm not following the TV market for the last 10+ years) We watch Netflix and regular cable and use the TV as a work screen for a PC (through HDMI) I play Grand Turismo on PS4 from time to time (once a month or so) and thats about it. We will be watching the screen pretty much dead on straight so viewing angles are not that important to us (who watches a TV from an angle?) Please list some options for me, I have no idea if I want OLED or QLED or whatever other quantum dot marketing crap they came up with. Oh...I will be having a 1GB fast internet hooked up to the TV either through Ethernet cable or WiFi depending on what gives better results.
Thanks in advance for any input.

Edit: It is worth mentioning that we use the PC through HDMI for Netflix and watching downloaded 720p movies on our current Pioneer plasma TV. This will obviously change with having a 4K smart TV but I would still like to be able to hook up my PC (I will upgrade my PC setup) to the TV and use it as a monitor for movies/MS Office/etc so TV's which only give good results with 4K signal are not for me. I also do some Photoshop/Lightroom work from time to time so it would be nice to have a screen which will be Adobe friendly (I presume Adobe RGB is supported by the better TV's?)
 
Last edited:

Dodgexander

Moderator
Samsung NU8000 sounds perfect for you, you don't need the Q7FN unless you want better HDR.

If you did want better HDR, Sony XF9005 is a better option than the QLEDs. Its usually cheaper and comes with good local dimming, something the Samsung models lack and something that is very important with HDR picture quality.

A word of warning about scaling and using a PC in general with a UHD TV. If you want things to display sharply at the native resolution you need to view very close to the TV. Otherwise you rely on scaling which isn't as sharp as it would be on a native HD display. Even with the best upscaling if you send a HD only signal to the TV it will have to upscale it and it won't look so sharp.

If you rely instead on windows for scaling, its not great.
 

koti

Member
Samsung NU8000 sounds perfect for you, you don't need the Q7FN unless you want better HDR.

If you did want better HDR, Sony XF9005 is a better option than the QLEDs. Its usually cheaper and comes with good local dimming, something the Samsung models lack and something that is very important with HDR picture quality.

A word of warning about scaling and using a PC in general with a UHD TV. If you want things to display sharply at the native resolution you need to view very close to the TV. Otherwise you rely on scaling which isn't as sharp as it would be on a native HD display. Even with the best upscaling if you send a HD only signal to the TV it will have to upscale it and it won't look so sharp.

If you rely instead on windows for scaling, its not great.

Gotcha. Thanks for the heads up, I will need to address this somehow or live with the crappy scaling, we'll see. Could you enlighten me on the difference in Samsung models? Whats the difference between UE65NU8002 and UE65NU8042 for example ?
 

koti

Member
Usually no difference at all apart from aesthetics. In the UK we have two models, one is silver sold everywhere and one is black sold only by one retailer.

It is probably similar in Poland.

Right, thanks again Dodgexander. I'm reading things here and there to try to start to get to up to date with the TV related tech but there's just so much of it and I've been away for so long that I'm afraid I will need a week which I don't have to gather the knowledge required to make a conscious decision. What is the next product and tech range/price range I should consider beyond the Samsung NU8000? Do I want to get into spending money on an OLED? I spent 2,5K GBP on my Pioneer plasma 12 years ago, who knows if I won't do it again. Although I really don't want to, I think. Damnit.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
OLED is a different technology altogether, similar to Plasma it brings benefits compared to LCDs so the benefits are across board.

Spending more on a higher end LCD than the NU8000 is really not something I would do unless you wanted better HDR. The next step up would be the Sony XF9005.

The LG B8 would be the OLED of choice for most people, but its pricing at 65" is a lot more compared to the 55" version versus LCDs of the same size.
 

koti

Member
OLED is a different technology altogether, similar to Plasma it brings benefits compared to LCDs so the benefits are across board.

Spending more on a higher end LCD than the NU8000 is really not something I would do unless you wanted better HDR. The next step up would be the Sony XF9005.

The LG B8 would be the OLED of choice for most people, but its pricing at 65" is a lot more compared to the 55" version versus LCDs of the same size.

I read some reviews on the 65" LG B8 and B7 and they look impressive. I started to look for prices at our local auction sites. It appears that there's a bunch of LG B7's being sold for half price with burnt screens after many hours in the stores. I guess that's a no-no right? Is the almost twice the price difference between the 65" Samsung NU8000 and 65" LG B8 justified? I will judge myself at the store this week but I'd like yours and other peoples opinion too, thanks.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Well that is my point, the OLEDs whilst great TVs carry more of a premium at 65" compared to LCDs than 55".

I would avoid any model that has a mention of burn in, its permanent and can't be removed.

For your uses I'd say the Samsung NU8000 is plenty, as you said the B8 would cost twice as much more and I'm not sure it will be twice as good.

If you wanted a TV with better HDR together with better overall picture quality there would be more value in it, but I don't think better HDR is going to be too useful for you which means the cost probably isn't justified.
 

koti

Member
Well that is my point, the OLEDs whilst great TVs carry more of a premium at 65" compared to LCDs than 55".

I would avoid any model that has a mention of burn in, its permanent and can't be removed.

For your uses I'd say the Samsung NU8000 is plenty, as you said the B8 would cost twice as much more and I'm not sure it will be twice as good.

If you wanted a TV with better HDR together with better overall picture quality there would be more value in it, but I don't think better HDR is going to be too useful for you which means the cost probably isn't justified.

I agree with you 100% on avoiding anything that has a risk of burn in, I've had enough of this risk with my plasma and don't want to continue with a new TV. I am currently decided for the NU8002 75" version. I'm going through your guides as I'm typing this, we'll see if I stick to my decision.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I agree with you 100% on avoiding anything that has a risk of burn in, I've had enough of this risk with my plasma and don't want to continue with a new TV. I am currently decided for the NU8002 75" version. I'm going through your guides as I'm typing this, we'll see if I stick to my decision.
Well there is a difference between buying a second hand/showroom TV that has burn in compared to buying a new OLED without any. OLED burn in is no different to Plasma really, its a risk but as long as you have varied use its a non-issue.

There is technology now on OLEDs that make them better at avoiding burn in even, unlike with Plasma TVs (last gen) where you got the pixel shift, grey bars etc on OLEDs you have automatic logo dimming and refresh cycles too.

If you meant that you are avoiding an OLED at all, even new because of burn in, don't unless you have specific usage that will make it a risk, see: OLED Burn In Risk

I am not sure if I misunderstood your last reply, but I still think for your use its hard to justify twice the price for an OLED.. it is up to you though.
 

koti

Member
Well there is a difference between buying a second hand/showroom TV that has burn in compared to buying a new OLED without any. OLED burn in is no different to Plasma really, its a risk but as long as you have varied use its a non-issue.

There is technology now on OLEDs that make them better at avoiding burn in even, unlike with Plasma TVs (last gen) where you got the pixel shift, grey bars etc on OLEDs you have automatic logo dimming and refresh cycles too.

If you meant that you are avoiding an OLED at all, even new because of burn in, don't unless you have specific usage that will make it a risk, see: OLED Burn In Risk

I am not sure if I misunderstood your last reply, but I still think for your use its hard to justify twice the price for an OLED.. it is up to you though.

To keep it simple:
1. I wanted a 65” and now I want a 75”
2. I won’t spend on a 75” OLED (or 65” for that matter”
3. I am now focused on the 75” Samsung NU8000, Im still open to suggestions though.
4. I am not willing to buy a second hand OLED nor any second hand TV, I did notice they cheaply sell a lot of the last years OLEDS with burnt screens on my local auction sites - thats not a good sign.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I am not willing to buy a second hand OLED nor any second hand TV, I did notice they cheaply sell a lot of the last years OLEDS with burnt screens on my local auction sites - thats not a good sign.
I don't really understand why that is not a good sign, it just means people are miss-using the TVs. Its also relative to how many have sold and probably also because those that do have damage, will never sell.

Anyway, It doesn't matter. NU8000 is the TV for you,
 

koti

Member
I don't really understand why that is not a good sign, it just means people are miss-using the TVs. Its also relative to how many have sold and probably also because those that do have damage, will never sell.

It seemed to me that a certain amount of last years OLED's being sold at 1/2 or close to 1/3 of their price should be a red light for me but I won't attempt to argue this, it might be my lack of knowledge or paranoia or both.

Anyway, It doesn't matter. NU8000 is the TV for you,

Unless comparing at the store will change my mind that's what I'll get. I'm also looking to upgrade to "MSI GeForce GTX 1060 Aero" or similar silent card to make use of the 4K/120Hz capability of the NU8000 and still keep my PC quiet.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Unless comparing at the store will change my mind that's what I'll get. I'm also looking to upgrade to "MSI GeForce GTX 1060 Aero" or similar silent card to make use of the 4K/120Hz capability of the NU8000 and still keep my PC quiet.
Consider an AMD card instead for Freesync support if you wish to game also.
It seemed to me that a certain amount of last years OLED's being sold at 1/2 or close to 1/3 of their price should be a red light for me but I won't attempt to argue this, it might be my lack of knowledge or paranoia or both.
Its irrelevant, you'd need to know how many sold compared to how many are for sale with burn in. If a TV has burn in its because its been miss-used in some way, LCDs can get burn in too if you abuse them enough.
 

koti

Member
Consider an AMD card instead for Freesync support if you wish to game also.

I just got a tip today from a friend who works at "CD Projekt Red" not to get a Radeon because they tend to get hot and they won't be quiet which is something I want since we will use the PC to work and watch movies on the new TV. I have a PS4 which I rarely use anyway (this might change after I get a 75" screen) and I certainly do not plan to game using the PC. I will read up on freesync though, I have no idea what it is.

Its irrelevant, you'd need to know how many sold compared to how many are for sale with burn in. If a TV has burn in its because its been miss-used in some way, LCDs can get burn in too if you abuse them enough.

Fair enough. I won't spend 3K+ Euro on a TV anyway which is what I'd have to spend to get a an OLED at 75" size.
 

koti

Member
Consider an AMD card instead for Freesync support if you wish to game also.

Okay, Im back from the store, 75” is too big, Im back to 65” I comapred the Samsung NU8000 and the Sony XF9005 side by side at 65” with various inputs and I don’t want to have anything to do with the Samsung NU8000. The picture is so much better on the Sony, the local dimming does its job so well and the volors seem so much better, Samsung is just dull compared. *** I knew this wasn’t going to be easy.

Edit: Is the Sony I saw at the store today which is the Sony KD65XF9005BAEP same product as the one from the link below and the same one which you mentioned in your earlier posts in this thread?
Sony X900F Review (XBR49X900F, XBR55X900F, XBR65X900F, XBR75X900F, XBR85X900F)
 
Last edited:

Dodgexander

Moderator
Okay, Im back from the store, 75” is too big, Im back to 65” I comapred the Samsung NU8000 and the Sony XF9005 side by side at 65” with various inputs and I don’t want to have anything to do with the Samsung NU8000. The picture is so much better on the Sony, the local dimming does its job so well and the volors seem so much better, Samsung is just dull compared. *** I knew this wasn’t going to be easy.

Edit: Is the Sony I saw at the store today which is the Sony KD65XF9005BAEP same product as the one from the link below and the same one which you mentioned in your earlier posts in this thread?
Sony X900F Review (XBR49X900F, XBR55X900F, XBR65X900F, XBR75X900F, XBR85X900F)
I would never judge a TV based on what you see in a shop, its just impossible with varying setups and horrible viewing conditions.

But the Sony is a better TV, especially if you want to use HDR. Local dimming is beneficial to all content of course, but not quite as important with SDR compared to HDR where the light output is on full.

It is available in 75" also, much the same as the Samsung.
 

koti

Member
I would never judge a TV based on what you see in a shop, its just impossible with varying setups and horrible viewing conditions.

But the Sony is a better TV, especially if you want to use HDR. Local dimming is beneficial to all content of course, but not quite as important with SDR compared to HDR where the light output is on full.

It is available in 75" also, much the same as the Samsung.

I’ll have a second look/comparison before I buy but as of what I’ve seen today I definitely think the Sony is worth the extra ~400 Euro, the overall color, motion control, brightness performance seems just on a different level compared to the Samsung. I won’t be getting the 75”, its too large for our living room.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I’ll have a second look/comparison before I buy but as of what I’ve seen today I definitely think the Sony is worth the extra ~400 Euro, the overall color, motion control, brightness performance seems just on a different level compared to the Samsung. I won’t be getting the 75”, its too large for our living room.
Its a step up in quality in many ways but it also has drawbacks too compared to the cheaper Samsung. I'll list a few:

Price
Design (its direct lit so a lot thicker)
Only 2x Full bandwidth HDMI ports, the other two only do UHD at max 30hz.
Android TV smart platform, its not as bad as it once was and some people like to be able to install many apps but its slower and more sluggish compared to Samsung's Tizen.

Its brightness is better and its local dimming is very beneficial with HDR where the Samsung will struggle more to separate light bits from dark. With SDR when the backlight is on low levels though there is less reason to have local dimming and the Samsung will still perform very well with SDR in a dark room and during dark scenes. Brightness is not important at all between the two TVs unless you are talking about HDR.

Motion is subjective, many people praise Sony's motion but Samsung do have one card up their sleeves and thats that their TVs are able to use dark frame insertion better than Sony models, to improve motion clarity without also inducing too noticeable flicker and soap opera effect. Remember though, on either TV you will get good motion once you tweak with the settings, neither will be impressive out of the box and certainly you can't compare motion between the two in the shop unless you are given the remote control to try out the different motion processing options in the menu. It is not like it once was in the days where X TV was better than Y without changing any settings, those days have gone.

Samsung also has other benefits due to its better HDMI configuration, it supports AMDs Freesync if you use an Xbox one or a PC with an AMD graphics card. In essence it has adaptive sync support which is going to be part of the HDMI 2.1 spec going forward.

The Samsung also can accept a 120hz signal at 1440p whilst the Sony is limited to 1080p at this refresh rate.

And lastly if you are a gamer, the Samsung supports motion interpolation in game mode, which is a good gaming feature to have if you want to reduce blur when gaming.

What the Sony has over the Samsung:
Better HDR due to local dimming and slightly higher peak brightness, Dolby Vision HDR support for Netflix/Apple TV/UHD Blu-rays if you are going to use any of those.
Better out of the box colour accuracy, the Sony will score higher using the movie preset than the Samsung will without calibration, this may be important if you do not want to pay for calibration. - Rtings.com scored the Samsung 7.5 out of the box whilst the Sony got 8.9 however if you want to photo edit and want the most accurate colours, it may be an idea to pay for professional calibration anyway.
Some people think that Sony's motion options are superior to Samsung, this is only really relevant though if you want to use motion interpolation.

A few other points:

TV size - You need to view very close to even a 75" TV if you want to make the most of UHD. I have a 65" and have to sit within 1m to notice UHD compared to FHD. A 75" from the standpoint of benefiting from UHD is definitely something recommended, even if it does seem a little big for your room. You have to remember though there is size vs quality vs distance relationship with TVs, the higher quality the source the better it is to view closer whilst the worse quality the source, the better it is to view farther.

Photo Editing - Not going to be ideal on any TV as they are not designed around the Adobe RGB colour space. TVs follow and track DCI-P3 colour spaces for HDR and rec709 for SDR. You can't "tell" the TV do Adobe RGB like you can with some monitors. You can of course try and edit in the rec709 colourspace instead but it won't be as accurate as a computer monitor tracking and calibrated to follow the AdobeRGB colour space.

To summarise, my original point remains the same, I think its possible without having a lot of HDR sources the Sony is not justified for 400 extra. If however you are willing to update your sources and use more HDR there is of course more value to be found in the Sony compared to the Samsung.

You just can't judge based on the shop, don't even bother. You'd need both TVs set up in the correct picture modes and the remote control to have a play with the different motion options, you'd also need to see the TVs in a dim environment compared to a lightly lit showroom. Not to mention some problems people face with TVs (especially motion) is when they pair them with their own equipment. This would be impossible to predict by viewing motion on a TV in a shop.

I know its a lot of info, but I hope it helps make your decision easier.
 

koti

Member
Its a step up in quality in many ways but it also has drawbacks too compared to the cheaper Samsung. I'll list a few:

Price
Design (its direct lit so a lot thicker)
Only 2x Full bandwidth HDMI ports, the other two only do UHD at max 30hz.
Android TV smart platform, its not as bad as it once was and some people like to be able to install many apps but its slower and more sluggish compared to Samsung's Tizen.

I agree, I like the Tizen more.

Its brightness is better and its local dimming is very beneficial with HDR where the Samsung will struggle more to separate light bits from dark. With SDR when the backlight is on low levels though there is less reason to have local dimming and the Samsung will still perform very well with SDR in a dark room and during dark scenes. Brightness is not important at all between the two TVs unless you are talking about HDR.

My overall impression was different form what you state, I had the lady dim the lights at various moments while I was testing both TV's and the Sony killed the Samsung.

Motion is subjective, many people praise Sony's motion but Samsung do have one card up their sleeves and thats that their TVs are able to use dark frame insertion better than Sony models, to improve motion clarity without also inducing too noticeable flicker and soap opera effect. Remember though, on either TV you will get good motion once you tweak with the settings, neither will be impressive out of the box and certainly you can't compare motion between the two in the shop unless you are given the remote control to try out the different motion processing options in the menu. It is not like it once was in the days where X TV was better than Y without changing any settings, those days have gone.

I'm very prone to the soap opera effect and I hate it, I've played around with both TV's and Sony seems to be well capable of tweaking. I admit I've played around more on the Sony than on the Samsung since I liked the picture on it more the second I saw it.

Samsung also has other benefits due to its better HDMI configuration, it supports AMDs Freesync if you use an Xbox one or a PC with an AMD graphics card. In essence it has adaptive sync support which is going to be part of the HDMI 2.1 spec going forward.

Screw that, the overall color crispness/motion/brightness on the Sony are killing the Samsung.

The Samsung also can accept a 120hz signal at 1440p whilst the Sony is limited to 1080p at this refresh rate.

That actually makes me still want to buy the Samsung but the colors and brightness on the Sony, damn.

And lastly if you are a gamer, the Samsung supports motion interpolation in game mode, which is a good gaming feature to have if you want to reduce blur when gaming.

Nope, I am not a gamer.

What the Sony has over the Samsung:
Better HDR due to local dimming and slightly higher peak brightness, Dolby Vision HDR support for Netflix/Apple TV/UHD Blu-rays if you are going to use any of those.

Netflix definitely yes. Apple TV maybe since I'm stuck with my iphone for reasons. UHD Blu-rays I had no idea they exist, probably a handflul of titles tho like with all new tech.

Better out of the box colour accuracy, the Sony will score higher using the movie preset than the Samsung will without calibration, this may be important if you do not want to pay for calibration. - Rtings.com scored the Samsung 7.5 out of the box whilst the Sony got 8.9 however if you want to photo edit and want the most accurate colours, it may be an idea to pay for professional calibration anyway.
Some people think that Sony's motion options are superior to Samsung, this is only really relevant though if you want to use motion interpolation.

I don't want to pay for calibration. If driven to the edge I shall do it myself with the help of friends, I'm most probably capable since I work with imaging&printing for HPE so I have acess to top spectrophotometers and colorometers.


Photo Editing - Not going to be ideal on any TV as they are not designed around the Adobe RGB colour space. TVs follow and track DCI-P3 colour spaces for HDR and rec709 for SDR. You can't "tell" the TV do Adobe RGB like you can with some monitors. You can of course try and edit in the rec709 colourspace instead but it won't be as accurate as a computer monitor tracking and calibrated to follow the AdobeRGB colour space.

I'll settle for sRGB, I had to ditch my serious approach to my photography hobby due to reasons so no harm here. AdobeRGB is not a significant factor, I have my Eizo for that in case I choose to come back to the scene.

To summarise, my original point remains the same, I think its possible without having a lot of HDR sources the Sony is not justified for 400 extra. If however you are willing to update your sources and use more HDR there is of course more value to be found in the Sony compared to the Samsung.

The picture was dull on the Samsung compared to the Sony, I will have to do the test again to confirm but it was very obvious to me today.

You just can't judge based on the shop, don't even bother. You'd need both TVs set up in the correct picture modes and the remote control to have a play with the different motion options, you'd also need to see the TVs in a dim environment compared to a lightly lit showroom. Not to mention some problems people face with TVs (especially motion) is when they pair them with their own equipment. This would be impossible to predict by viewing motion on a TV in a shop.

Oh common, I had both TV's set up side by side with both remotes in my hands and 3 sales folks running around me asking if all is good. They dimmed the lights when I asked and the nice twenty something lady went thru all the deep stuff (motion/lighting) with me on both the Samsung and the Sony. I have to admit I was surprised, I'm 20 years engineer for a major tech company, must be getting old I guess.


I know its a lot of info, but I hope it helps make your decision easier.

It is and tt does. I appreciate you taking the time to write all you wrote in this thread, I really do. I have no idea what I will choose at the end, its a process that takes time, I've been away from the scene for too long and I have to learn everything back again. I'm all for the Sony tonight, we'll see what happens when I gather more knowledge. Thank you Dodgexander, you're a lot of help.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
Oh common, I had both TV's set up side by side with both remotes in my hands and 3 sales folks running around me asking if all is good. They dimmed the lights when I asked and the nice twenty something lady went thru all the deep stuff (motion/lighting) with me on both the Samsung and the Sony. I have to admit I was surprised, I'm 20 years engineer for a major tech company, must be getting old I guess.
That's more service than you get anywhere in the UK lol
 

Analysis

Well-known Member
You could just go for a Hisense A6100 or A6200 or the Hisense U7A at 65" and save a load of money in the process as you've said already that HDR isn't something you are interested in, to be honest it's still very niche and a format war is ongoing, you might find you are overspending for your needs.
 

koti

Member
You could just go for a Hisense A6100 or A6200 or the Hisense U7A at 65" and save a load of money in the process as you've said already that HDR isn't something you are interested in, to be honest it's still very niche and a format war is ongoing, you might find you are overspending for your needs.

I plan to use the new TV for the next several years, probably 10 or so. I used the Pioneer PDP436XDE for 12 years and only now I'm switching to a new TV so I'm comfortable with paying a little more. I went to a different store today and looked at the Samsung NU8000 and the Sony X900F again and I feel a bit lost...do I really want/need to pay extra for local dimming and full array backlight in the Sony or do stick with the Samsung. A few more days of TV tech research and I'll be getting a high-end OLED along with selling my kidney in the process.
 

Dodgexander

Moderator
I plan to use the new TV for the next several years, probably 10 or so. I used the Pioneer PDP436XDE for 12 years and only now I'm switching to a new TV so I'm comfortable with paying a little more. I went to a different store today and looked at the Samsung NU8000 and the Sony X900F again and I feel a bit lost...do I really want/need to pay extra for local dimming and full array backlight in the Sony or do stick with the Samsung. A few more days of TV tech research and I'll be getting a high-end OLED along with selling my kidney in the process.
That seems to be the way most of us who make these threads go haha
 

koti

Member
That seems to be the way most of us who make these threads go haha

Okay, I came to my senses and I’m opting for the Sony XF900F again. I figure the QLED’s are not worth so much extra compared to what they offer and the LG B8 price still hasnt come down plus the OLED scares me as my wife tends to pause for hours either on purpose or falls asleep. I found a deal on the Sony XF900F 65” - 1551 Euro including delivery, hookup and calibration. Any thoughts before I pull the trigger?

To the mods - I apologize for posting a selling offer for my Pioneer plasma in this thread last friday, this was due to a whiskey sale they had here in my local store. If my deleted post still exists I would love to have it sent to my inbox to post it again, this time in the classifieds section. Much obliged.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Q Acoustics Q3030i, Humax Aura, Roku Streambar & WandaVision Reviews and more...

Latest News

Focal releases 1000 Series integrated speakers
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Klipsch announces ProMedia 2.1 BT speaker set
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
No Time to Die gets pushed to 8th Oct 2021
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
KEF announces KC62 subwoofer with new Uni-Core technology
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 20th January 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Top Bottom