Originally posted by infinityshock
I used to buy Samsung because of the supposed quality. Now they've turned shit-tier. I have a few portable hard drives than seem to be pretty good…but their tvs are crap and their appliances are even worse.
Depends on the model tbh.
Samsung (also applies to Sony) have some of the absolute best TVs on the market as part of their range, they also have some complete dogshit and mediocre LED TVs on the lower to mid end.
Samsung's OLED's are still pretty top notch. I'd say probably the only company with comparably both good panels + good image processing is Sony. This is if we are talking about high end TVs.
Sony's image processing is the absolute best but Samsung does usually use better panels for the price, though functionally Sonys can still come out ahead in image reproduction accuracy because their image processing algorithm is the best bar none.
Originally posted by aldra
all of the major manufacturers buy their panels from the same few places and just add microphones and shit
That is indeed the case but that doesn't mean all the manufacturers produce equally good TVs or even displays. Software is super important nowadays.
E.g. The image processing algorithms make a massive difference in dynamic range + color reproduction and motion handling.
Like most modern LED TVs come with localized backlight dimming zones so certain parts can be illuminated for display while others can be darkened for contrast.
Intuitively most people would figure more dimming zones = better HDR reproduction. But in practice Sony's image processing algorithms give it the edge in actually accurately reproducing what was mastered on an expensive reference monitor by the studio, even with relatively very few local dimming zones:
Is it worth the premium they charge? That's up to you to decide but in practice there is a lot more to it than the hardware.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Also on a more basic level, the actual TV software can make a reasonably big difference in how the user experience works. How it interacts with your media box/if it doesn't then how easy it is to adjust it to various content etc does have a significant impact.
Also audio quality is a big point of variance, not everybody really needs/wants a soundbar, some higher end TV speakers can be perfectly adequate for stereo audio reproduction and the digital processing can produce a decent surround experience for casual viewers, and again the software makes a really big functional difference there.
Originally posted by aldra
I remember that movie really clearly because I had to watch it for school and halfway through my parents had a massive fight and were throwing dinner plates around
Also I know that the general zeitgeist tech nerd opinion is to never use the "Smart TV" functionalities built into any TV, just use a TV box like Apple TV etc but genuinely for average consumers this is quickly becoming pretty shit advice because for example Apple TV doesn't support full Atmos codecs, while the box with the best audio codec support (Shield TV Pro 4K) is old as fuck now and does not hardware support for VP9 Profile 2 so no YT HDR support, you can only watch 1080p HDR with software decoding with shit laggy performance.
Modern, better TVs are coming with faster LAN ports, full codec support and decent processing power, decent UX software that support all the big streaming apps with direct optimal codec support...
Pretty much you can plug your audio receiver into the eARC port and your new TV streaming experience is ready to go.
Originally posted by Loing
That is indeed the case but that doesn't mean all the manufacturers produce equally good TVs or even displays. Software is super important nowadays.
E.g. The image processing algorithms make a massive difference in dynamic range + color reproduction and motion handling.
Like most modern LED TVs come with localized backlight dimming zones so certain parts can be illuminated for display while others can be darkened for contrast.
Intuitively most people would figure more dimming zones = better HDR reproduction. But in practice Sony's image processing algorithms give it the edge in actually accurately reproducing what was mastered on an expensive reference monitor by the studio, even with relatively very few local dimming zones:
Is it worth the premium they charge? That's up to you to decide but in practice there is a lot more to it than the hardware.
