LG 48CX

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
It's wrong for the 65" - the stand is 10lbs, not 20lbs.
What are you talking about? The stand for the 65" C9 weighs ~17lbs and the second piece weighs ~2.2lbs. According to the LG page, the difference is 19.1lbs. That's exactly correct.

(no I'm not weighing my TV, but I'm 100% certain the 55lb number on the LG page is correct.)
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
366
It's wrong for the 65" - the stand is 10lbs, not 20lbs.
No way. My 55" B9 stand isn't anywhere near that. The 65" may be have a slightly bigger one, but no way is it 10lbs... that's REALLY heavy for a stand, would practically have to be solid cast iron steel to way that much lol!
 

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
No way. My 55" B9 stand isn't anywhere near that. The 65" may be have a slightly bigger one, but no way is it 10lbs... that's REALLY heavy for a stand, would practically have to be solid cast iron steel to way that much lol!
B9 and C9 have very different stands with very different weights. The C9 stand is very heavy.
 

delita

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,555
B9 and C9 have very different stands with very different weights. The C9 stand is very heavy.
I can confirm this. The 65 C9 stand was like pulling a boulder out of the box. No way it's 10lbs.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
I can confirm this. The 65 C9 stand was like pulling a boulder out of the box. No way it's 10lbs.
Yeah putting up my 65" LG C9 was a two person job to make it comfortable. The stand is big, heavy and crappy design compared to the sleek and tiny ones on my previous Samsung TV.

Also if any of you are planning to wall mount or monitor arm the LG CX 48" then remember that the VESA mounting point does not sit at the center of the back but at bottom center of the screen.
 

delita

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,555
Yeah putting up my 65" LG C9 was a two person job to make it comfortable. The stand is big, heavy and crappy design compared to the sleek and tiny ones on my previous Samsung TV.

Also if any of you are planning to wall mount or monitor arm the LG CX 48" then remember that the VESA mounting point does not sit at the center of the back but at bottom center of the screen.
Damn right. Also I was scared shitless picking it up. We're likely moving later this year and I'm deathly afraid of transporting it, even if it's just across town.
 

Murzilka

Gawd
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
696
Damn right. Also I was scared shitless picking it up. We're likely moving later this year and I'm deathly afraid of transporting it, even if it's just across town.
You will need this:


I transported mine couple of weeks ago (not myself, but by a moving company). Even with the display completely wrapped up, I was extremely worried when I was removing the wrap to see a crack on the screen. Thankfully, all went well. Transporting a 55" OLED is definitely a 2 person job.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
Damn right. Also I was scared shitless picking it up. We're likely moving later this year and I'm deathly afraid of transporting it, even if it's just across town.
Same here. First off the box barely fit in the car and the way to get it out of the box and install the stand is excessively complicated for such a simple thing. Since the display is so thin and it comes with a paper saying "don't pick it up from here, here, here and here" I didn't know where the hell I was supposed to carry it. By comparison my previous 65" Samsung I can carry by myself no problem and setting it up is super easy with the breakout box. LG would be wise to adopt something similar because having all the inputs at the side and back is a bit annoying.
 

tybert7

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
2,655
Same here. First off the box barely fit in the car and the way to get it out of the box and install the stand is excessively complicated for such a simple thing. Since the display is so thin and it comes with a paper saying "don't pick it up from here, here, here and here" I didn't know where the hell I was supposed to carry it. By comparison my previous 65" Samsung I can carry by myself no problem and setting it up is super easy with the breakout box. LG would be wise to adopt something similar because having all the inputs at the side and back is a bit annoying.
I bought a 55" b9 for my mother to replace an old tv, and it's a terrible design imo from a logistical standpoint.

Having a thin area on top is meaningless if the base is very thick, it just makes handling the tv more difficult. And from a technical standpoint, Panasonic has showed that having a thicker back with more robust cooling helps achieve higher peak and sustained brightness. I never understand why having some hyper thin tv was more important than performance. If a tv was an inch thick across the board, that would be fine by me, and easier to carry if needed.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
I bought a 55" b9 for my mother to replace an old tv, and it's a terrible design imo from a logistical standpoint.

Having a thin area on top is meaningless if the base is very thick, it just makes handling the tv more difficult. And from a technical standpoint, Panasonic has showed that having a thicker back with more robust cooling helps achieve higher peak and sustained brightness. I never understand why having some hyper thin tv was more important than performance. If a tv was an inch thick across the board, that would be fine by me, and easier to carry if needed.
Definitely. I understand the OLED can be very thin due to how it is manufactured but then having a bulkier section sticking out the back makes it thick again. Mounting on the wall is pretty much the only time thickness matters as you can make it look more like a painting if it's thin but even then it doesn't need to be super thin to look right. Visually, my older Samsung KS8000 looks thinner because the overall package is thinner and curved in the back.
 

Baenwort

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
171
Nah, only the 48" 4k and 77" 8k share the same sheet as they have the same pixel density. The reason we have a 48" is probably because this increases the yield for them when they make the 8k panel as they probably can cut out parts that are faulty and use it as a 48" 4k panel instead.
So I need them to make a 8K 65" display so I can get the 32" 4k OLED I want?
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,526
Pathetic weaklings.

When my 65" was delivered I unpackaged it and put it together all by myself.
After a 55" CCFL-based LCD I moved several times alone, the OLED was practically nothing. Stand off, both fit fine in the backseat of my Accord. Together, actually, as I still have both and we just moved.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,309
It's not the weight that makes it awkward, it's the lack of anything to grab onto. Someone mentioned earlier that they should just extend the back of the TV where the IO is up to the top. I think the just need to build in some sort of handle or include some kind of removable attachment for mounting. Personally I don't care if half of the TV is only 0.5mm thick or whatever.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
It's not the weight that makes it awkward, it's the lack of anything to grab onto. Someone mentioned earlier that they should just extend the back of the TV where the IO is up to the top. I think the just need to build in some sort of handle or include some kind of removable attachment for mounting. Personally I don't care if half of the TV is only 0.5mm thick or whatever.
The main issue is that the stand is incredibly excessive in both size and weight. It pokes out a lot from the back:

c9-thickness-small.jpg

vs a 2016 Samsung KS8000 that I replaced with the LG C9:

ks8000-thickness-small.jpg

A Samsung style breakout box for connecting things would also be much easier to work with.

Anyone considering the LG CX 48" would do well to start also considering a heavy duty monitor arm unless you have a very deep desk to deal with the bulky stand and are ok with having zero adjustment range.
 

delita

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,555
The main issue is that the stand is incredibly excessive in both size and weight. It pokes out a lot from the back:

View attachment 221344

vs a 2016 Samsung KS8000 that I replaced with the LG C9:

View attachment 221345

A Samsung style breakout box for connecting things would also be much easier to work with.

Anyone considering the LG CX 48" would do well to start also considering a heavy duty monitor arm unless you have a very deep desk to deal with the bulky stand and are ok with having zero adjustment range.
100% agree. Even for TV use, the unit sits so low a soundbar is not useable without blocking some of the screen. Thankfully I ended up going with a stereo system that doesnt have anything blocking the TV.

For PC use case, I have all kinds of shit sitting around on my desk and I would definitely want it mounted.
 

Iratus

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
1,283
Anyone considering the LG CX 48" would do well to start also considering a heavy duty monitor arm unless you have a very deep desk to deal with the bulky stand and are ok with having zero adjustment range.
This took me on a tangent of it's a shame that you can't (I believe) select where the picture is output with a 1:1 non native resolution.

You could totally wall mount, have the screen going below the desktop and then lower the resolution to 3840 * 1660, display the picture flush to the top edge and the bottom 5 inches just black, boom "gypsy ultrawide" I'd consider that.
 

Wag

Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
993
I said I wasn’t going to get another 48” display this time- unless this gets terrible reviews it looks like I am wrong.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
51
I said I wasn’t going to get another 48” display this time- unless this gets terrible reviews it looks like I am wrong.
Anyone considering getting this as computer monitor for more than games/videos should really look at how it shows text before buying. I tried to live with the text rendering issues on my 55" C9 for over a month, and couldn't get used to it - it was truly annoying. After a while, I disabled ClearType, and it was overall better with just grayscale smoothing, but inferior to an LCD with ClearType, of course, so still couldn't live with it. I gave up on it for anything other than games/videos, and switched to a 55" LG IPS TV which renders text very well.
 

AngryLobster

Clueless
Joined
Aug 24, 2016
Messages
191
Yeah that's one of the reasons I ditched mine last week. Text looks bad, HDR in PC mode is atrocious and basically unusable especially if you use madVR + I got tired of the babysitting.

As a media consumption / secondary gaming display it's awesome but too many quirks as a dedicated monitor IMO.
 

delita

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,555
Yeah that's one of the reasons I ditched mine last week. Text looks bad, HDR in PC mode is atrocious and basically unusable especially if you use madVR + I got tired of the babysitting.

As a media consumption / secondary gaming display it's awesome but too many quirks as a dedicated monitor IMO.
So, that being said...are you expecting the 48" to solve any of those issues or believe it will likely be pretty much the same, thus, unusable for you as a full time monitor.
 

Skott

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,050
Obviously we'll have to wait for release to see what the real deal is about this unit.
 

kasakka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,444
I just tried the Better Cleartype Tuner with RGB and grayscale AA settings and grayscale definitely looks better on my 65" LG C9. If I look at the display close enough I could see some fringing on this very page for example but it was not possible to see on white background and black text pages for example. Tried PC vs game console mode but didn't see much difference between those.

For the record MacOS Mojave and above defaults to no font smoothing these days as most Macs have very high PPI displays. If enabled it uses grayscale font smoothing. But MacOS does not align text to a pixel grid like Windows does so it's not quite the same use case.
 
Last edited:

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
I don't have any problems with the text rendering on my 65" C9, so I expect none with the CX. However, I also don't intend to use it any closer than 36" and scaling will likely be set to at least 125% if not 150%, I'll have to test that out.
 

Wag

Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
993
We shall see when it's released. I learned my lesson a long time ago about pre-ordering. I let others review things for me.

I've been mostly happy with my 5yr old Samsung UN48JU6700F, it's not a bad display, it's just not very flexible. 8bit and not true HDR. Would like something better.
 

x3sphere

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
2,695
When using DPI scaling (150%) I think text looks fine on my 55" C6. With no scaling, I would agree it doesn't look as good as an LCD. So if you use DPI scaling - may not be an issue.
 

Lateralus

More [H]uman than Human
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
15,178
I don't have any problems with the text rendering on my 65" C9, so I expect none with the CX. However, I also don't intend to use it any closer than 36" and scaling will likely be set to at least 125% if not 150%, I'll have to test that out.
This is how I feel as well. I've had no qualms with the text quality on my 55" B7, and I would expect it to be at least as good (or better) on the 48CX due to the smaller pixel size. If I get really really close to the screen, I can see some minor fringing but I can't say that it's noticeably worse than other large displays that I've used. It's certainly nowhere in the ballpark of "awful" but obviously I can't speak for everyone as much of it is going to depend on visual acuity and viewing distance.

Being totally objective, text on the B7 might be a tad fuzzier than it was on my UN48JS9000, but I would also expect it to be because that display had smaller pixels. I remember enabling 4:4:4 on the Samsungs for the first time and being awed at how sharp the text was compared to previous TVs that I had tried that only supported 4:2:2 or 4:2:0. I find the 55B7 totally acceptable for daily use though, and being that I use it for work (not just games and movies) I deal with a lot of text between websites and application windows. With that being said, I haven't experimented with the ClearType Tuner. Perhaps I'll download that just to see if there's an improvement to be had as kasakka mentioned, but I really have no complaints as it is now. It excels in everything else so much that it's simply a non-issue for me. If I found the text horrible then there's no way I could have worked off it daily for the past couple of years.
 

AngryLobster

Clueless
Joined
Aug 24, 2016
Messages
191
So, that being said...are you expecting the 48" to solve any of those issues or believe it will likely be pretty much the same, thus, unusable for you as a full time monitor.
No, the text will still be poor and HDR has been broken in PC mode for 3 generations of OLED. It will be slightly more usable due to the size but 48" is still way too big for even a 3FT deep desk which is what I used a 49" X900F with prior.

http://www.displaywars.com/48-inch-16x9-vs-55-inch-16x9
It's roughly 6 inches less wide and 3 inches shorter in height.
 

Sancus

Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
996
48" is still way too big for even a 3FT deep desk which is what I used a 49" X900F with prior.
Not sure what you're talking about, 36" is the ITU recommended viewing distance for a 48" 16:9 display(1.5x height or 0.75x diagonal) -- if you think it's way too big chances are you like your screens further away than is best, which is fine if that's your preference, but it's not really useful for anybody else.

It doesn't matter how deep your desk is because you can mount displays behind your desk, though. Just matters how much room space you have.

I figure if you want HDR for a particular game you can just switch modes for that... assuming they don't resolve the various issues, which it seems like they ought to now they're advertising this specifically for gaming.
 

Luke M

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
418
If you insist on using small fonts on a low ppi display, why not turn off antialiasing? It looks way better (with properly "hinted" fonts) than the blurry mess AA makes when it doesn't have enough pixels.
 

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,464
So two loud users hate text on the OLEDs and are basically writing them off already, while the rest don't care and use them regularly.
Hmm

Sounds like horses for courses and setup.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
51
If you insist on using small fonts on a low ppi display, why not turn off antialiasing? It looks way better (with properly "hinted" fonts) than the blurry mess AA makes when it doesn't have enough pixels.
It's not the PPI. The LG 55SM9000 (RGB IPS panel) renders small ClearType fonts fine, and it has the same PPI as the 55 C9 which is a mess of fringing with ClearType. The problem is the different sub-pixel structure on the LG OLED.
 

Wag

Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
993
So two loud users hate text on the OLEDs and are basically writing them off already, while the rest don't care and use them regularly.
Hmm

Sounds like horses for courses and setup.
Wait for the reviews.
 

bananadude

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
366
Wait for the reviews.
Most reviews are going to focus on its performance as a TV and gaming screen... both of which I am sure it will perform quite admirably. Needs a PCMonitors or TFTCentral review to highlight any text issues, and outside of that it's very much going to be down to user preference.
 

Luke M

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
418
It's not the PPI. The LG 55SM9000 (RGB IPS panel) renders small ClearType fonts fine, and it has the same PPI as the 55 C9 which is a mess of fringing with ClearType. The problem is the different sub-pixel structure on the LG OLED.
I know Cleartype is limited to RGB/BGR. My point is, why use antialiasing at all?
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
51
I know Cleartype is limited to RGB/BGR. My point is, why use antialiasing at all?
What you would want to achieve is font rendering quality which is at least as good as ClearType fonts on an LCD. There is currently no way to achieve that on the LG OLED. You don't get it with ClearType enabled or disabled. With ClearType enabled, you get fringing on the OLED. With ClearType disabled, the fringing goes away, but the font rendering is worse than on an LCD with ClearType enabled. You lose the better font rendering of ClearType. There is nothing you can do currently to make the fonts on the 55" C9 (with or without ClearType) look as good as the fonts on the 55" SM9000 (with ClearType). Maybe someday there will be ClearType support for the LG OLED sub-pixel structure, although I don't know if it's technically feasible or not.

I thought I would just get used to the inferior text. It is usable - it's not horrible, but it isn't good. Ultimately, I gave up on it - I spend too many hours with text. I switched to the 55" IPS TV, and it has been a great relief. The annoyance is gone.
 

Wag

Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
993
Most reviews are going to focus on its performance as a TV and gaming screen... both of which I am sure it will perform quite admirably. Needs a PCMonitors or TFTCentral review to highlight any text issues, and outside of that it's very much going to be down to user preference.
Its nice you know how all the reviews are before they actually come out.
 

Luke M

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
418
What you would want to achieve is font rendering quality which is at least as good as ClearType fonts on an LCD. There is currently no way to achieve that on the LG OLED.
I agree that Cleartype (when it works) is better than AA without Cleartype. But as far as Cleartype versus no-AA, that's personal preference. One is not better than the other in all respects.
 
Top