LG Dismisses New Samsung QLED TV Technology: “It's Still An LCD Panel”

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Why aren’t the more prominent display manufacturers jumping into OLED? LG’s vice chairman is wondering the same thing. Apparently, Samsung was crazy enough to suggest that QLED technology is the best anyone is going to get, declaring competing displays “meaningless.”

As Samsung Electronics has released its new quantum-dot light-emitting diode (QLED) television, it has led to a confrontation for materials with LG Electronics, which is focusing on organic light-emitting diode (OLED) televisions, again. When Samsung Electronics showcased its new QLED TV, Kim Hyun-seok, president of Samsung Electronics' visual display (VD) business division said, “Further competition of visual quality is meaningless." In this regard, LG said, “The QLED is still a liquid crystal display (LCD) television.” …“The only change in Samsung Electronics’ new product and previous one is luminance. In quantum dot, luminance can vary according to backlight. It is true that Samsung improved the efficiency of quantum dot, but it is a very small part of it. It is still a LCD panel.”
 
Competition is good. Can't wait until OLED tech (or equivalent) becomes cost friendly.
 
When I saw that. WTF. Are they really going to fool people in thinking the "Q" looks like an "O"? They could have named it something else, but purposefully went with Q for marketing. BS.
 
I almost want to say OLED will be compared to the more recently retired plasma TV's.

However OLED is still thinner by far... and thats why LCD's caught on, along with price as well initially.

It may continue to only be a high-end product but we'll see i guess.
 
Good for LG calling out Samsung for more of its lies and deceptive advertising. And seeing the statements here, people are ignorantly buying into it. It is not QLED. This has been discussed to death at AVSForum. QLED isn't going to be ready till 2020 because like when OLED was being developed the blue solution is not able to hold its color, its at 2% where as its needs to be 20% to last 5 years. So like Samsung does so well lets respin what QLED is till the tech is actually ready.

By the time QLED actually becomes a thing, OLED with be 4 generations ahead. There also is no perfect display, but OLED is pretty damn close. All these major review tech sites gave LG the best TV award for 2016. Motherfuckers MUST BE LYING!

I have spent enough time with the 65" E6 I bought my mom to know most problems from motion to burn in are bullshit. Specially burn in since the TV's have that protection built in. Had the Family over for Thanksgiving watching Lions game and asked out of 20 people if they saw any judder/studder. Nope. Same with Wings games. For every one person that has a bad panel and posts on a forum about it, 100 others stay silent and happy. Also, at Xmas time LG OLED supply was wiped out.

Now with Sony adding their special sauce to LG's OLED display panels, we will see how awesome OLED really is this year.

The reason I am so pro-Oled is because as consumers the TV industry went the cheapest, thinnest route for the last 18 years with LCD's piss poor and cheaper picture quality. People gave up picture quality to have the flattest display. And there were better tech at the time not just plasma. LG shook the tree, and consumers responded.
 
SparkedFire said:
I agree. I think OLED is overrated.
Click to expand...
Thing is, LCD is shit, so anything is better in comparison. OLED still has more positives than negatives. Not enough to replace my plasma yet, but hopefully it'll get there.

Quantum LED is just a polished turd. Panasonic has something new, but I still have doubts it will solve LCD's biggest problems. More potential than QLED, that's for sure.
 
SnowBeast said:
I have spent enough time with the 65" E6 I bought my mom to know most problems from motion to burn in are bullshit. Specially burn in since the TV's have that protection built in. Had the Family over for Thanksgiving watching Lions game and asked out of 20 people if they saw any judder/studder. Nope. Same with Wings games.
Click to expand...

It's not judder that's the problem. It's motion resolution/blurring and it's objectively bad in comparison. Bad enough for everyone to care? No. Bad compared to plasma and better LCDs? Yes.
 
SnowBeast said:
Good for LG calling out Samsung for more of its lies and deceptive advertising. And seeing the statements here, people are ignorantly buying into it. It is not QLED. This has been discussed to death at AVSForum. QLED isn't going to be ready till 2020 because like when OLED was being developed the blue solution is not able to hold its color, its at 2% where as its needs to be 20% to last 5 years. So like Samsung does so well lets respin what QLED is till the tech is actually ready.

By the time QLED actually becomes a thing, OLED with be 4 generations ahead. There also is no perfect display, but OLED is pretty damn close. All these major review tech sites gave LG the best TV award for 2016. Motherfuckers MUST BE LYING!

I have spent enough time with the 65" E6 I bought my mom to know most problems from motion to burn in are bullshit. Specially burn in since the TV's have that protection built in. Had the Family over for Thanksgiving watching Lions game and asked out of 20 people if they saw any judder/studder. Nope. Same with Wings games. For every one person that has a bad panel and posts on a forum about it, 100 others stay silent and happy. Also, at Xmas time LG OLED supply was wiped out.

Now with Sony adding their special sauce to LG's OLED display panels, we will see how awesome OLED really is this year.

The reason I am so pro-Oled is because as consumers the TV industry went the cheapest, thinnest route for the last 18 years with LCD's piss poor and cheaper picture quality. People gave up picture quality to have the flattest display. And there were better tech at the time not just plasma. LG shook the tree, and consumers responded.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that there are no quantum dot displays on the market already? And that's why you're an acolyte of the Church of Holy OLED Perfection?
 
Meeho said:
It's not judder that's the problem. It's motion resolution/blurring and it's objectively bad in comparison. Bad enough for everyone to care? No. Bad compared to plasma and better LCDs? Yes.
Click to expand...
I, OTOH, always hated Plasma. Yes there was a few ultra high end plasmas that were acceptable, but aside from them, if found the space between pixels annoying. I was more of a LCOS fan, but I think my next set will be OLED. Seems like most A/V sites rate them at or near the top and even Consumer Reports says it's the best set. Now will I get this wallpaper set? We'll see what it costs, but the regular sets are definitely in my wheelhouse.
 
And a Laferrari is still just a car, I don't even understand why don't we drive the model-t.
 
Megalith said:
Why aren’t the more prominent display manufacturers jumping into OLED? LG’s vice chairman is wondering the same thing. Apparently, Samsung was crazy enough to suggest that QLED technology is the best anyone is going to get, declaring competing displays “meaningless.”
Click to expand...

Here's what I understand so far:

1) LG purchased the white OLED rights from Kodak some years ago. LG uses white OLED as a backlight which makes manufacturing easier and produces greater yields than someone like Samsung that has to use RGB OLED.

2) LG using white OLED as a backlight largely mitigates burn-in found on other OLED panels. The per pixel RGB OLED has a greater chance of burnin seeing as how a static image may use a particular OLED color longer than the pixels surrounding it (and thus shortening its life). This is why you see more comments of burn-in from RGB OLED panels (e.g. Samsung phones).

https://www.cnet.com/news/lg-says-white-oled-gives-it-ten-years-on-tv-competition/
 
IdiotInCharge said:
So you're saying that there are no quantum dot displays on the market already? And that's why you're an acolyte of the Church of Holy OLED Perfection?
Click to expand...

That's not what he is saying at all. Samsung is falsely parading LCD panel TVs under the guise of a technology that isn't going to be available until 2020.

Go ahead and grant people whatever fictitious title suits your fancy it doesn't change the fact that OLED TVs are in fact OLED TVs and Samsung's QLED TV's are not. Unless you'd like to call them what they really are Quality Lacking Electronic Displays.
 
As the years go by the H users get lighter. OLED is the best, I guess you guys want LCD VR too and LCD phone displays and all the shitty problems with LCD like slow response, terrible blacks, no contrast, poor accuracy, etc.
 
alxnet7227 said:
Here's what I understand so far:

1) LG purchased the white OLED rights from Kodak some years ago. LG uses white OLED as a backlight which makes manufacturing easier and produces greater yields than someone like Samsung that has to use RGB OLED.

2) LG using white OLED as a backlight largely mitigates burn-in found on other OLED panels. The per pixel RGB OLED has a greater chance of burnin seeing as how a static image may use a particular OLED color longer than the pixels surrounding it (and thus shortening its life). This is why you see more comments of burn-in from RGB OLED panels (e.g. Samsung phones).

https://www.cnet.com/news/lg-says-white-oled-gives-it-ten-years-on-tv-competition/
Click to expand...
OLED TVs don't have backlights as OLED is emissive and doesn't need a backlight, unlike LCD. However if you remove "as a backlight" from your post, it would be accurate.
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
OLED TVs don't have backlights as OLED is emissive and doesn't need a backlight, unlike LCD. However if you remove "as a backlight" from your post, it would be accurate.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's right...

I've always understood it to be a backlight as well.... in LG's anyways not in any other OLED.

The reason it works is because it's still a lightbulb for every pixel.
And each lightbulb is toggleable.

This makes it different from Samung, being it uses a color filter of some type layered on top of lightbulbs
just like LCD does currently, but in LCD's its absolute crap for since it uses "zones" or light bulbs numbered
in the thousands as opposed to millions with white OLED. Allowing precise control of blacks making
an amazing contrast ratio.

But again i have nothing to link to, that's just how I personally understood it.

EDIT: edited several times for clarity
 
Derfman said:
That's not what he is saying at all. Samsung is falsely parading LCD panel TVs under the guise of a technology that isn't going to be available until 2020.

Go ahead and grant people whatever fictitious title suits your fancy it doesn't change the fact that OLED TVs are in fact OLED TVs and Samsung's QLED TV's are not. Unless you'd like to call them what they really are Quality Lacking Electronic Displays.
Click to expand...

Okay that's just a tad bit harsh. lol

I for one and glad Samsung is around. They make some quality products, many at great price points that are affordable for ordinary peasants like myself. And if they weren't competing, LG would continue to demand very high prices for their OLEDs. Here's to hoping Samsung succeeds.
 
Liver said:
When I saw that. WTF. Are they really going to fool people in thinking the "Q" looks like an "O"? They could have named it something else, but purposefully went with Q for marketing. BS.
Click to expand...
Plus, Q comes after O = more advanced. Duh!

Terpfen said:
Cost, burn-in, excessive saturation… can think of plenty of reasons to not move to OLED.
Click to expand...
Do I hear regret buying an expensive LCD TV? ;)

  • Cost will come down
  • Burn-in is a non-issue with algorithms. Plasma proved that.
  • Excessive saturation a problem?? Things can always be desaturated. Impossible the other way.

So ya, best technology since plasma.
 
While OLED panels do look great - especially if you can calibrate them as they do tend to be oversatured more often than not - the downside is OLED has a limited lifespan because of their (literal) organic nature. While direct burn-in has been mitigated in many newer models of OLED panels, the fact remains that over time OLED displays dim and just don't look nearly as bright as they do when they're brand new. They literally are "dying" from the moment they're turned on the first time and there's nothing that can prevent that from happening. OLED dies from day one and just gets dimmer over time so for me I don't think I'd ever consider it as a potential TV panel for myself - my Galaxy Note 4 that I just got second-hand for a crazy low price has a SuperAMOLED panel in it and since it's 2 years old (this was one of the very first ones manufactured from November 2014) it has fairly noticeable dimming and some burn-in in various places like the notification bar which is expected. It only really becomes noticeable on brighter backgrounds and having bright colors on an OLED is what causes the accelerated "death" so I tend to keep things darker with wallpapers and shift things around whenever possible but it's not going to last forever, obviously.

Besides, in our disposable society nobody buys such things for really extended periods like days of old meaning years and years of use. Hell, I have a CRT TV here that's probably 20 years old now and I got it from the original owner about 8 years ago, works just fine for me but yes it's big and cumbersome but I haven't moved it from where it sits since I got it. Sure I'd love to have a nice 40-50" panel of some kind on the wall where the TV sits in front of now, would save some space obviously but I don't even watch actual TV all that much anymore because of so much online potential nowadays.
 
sleepeeg3 said:
Do I hear regret buying an expensive LCD TV? ;)
Click to expand...

I haven't bought a TV in about four years, and paid $600 for a 55'' set. Doing just fine, thanks.

Cost will come down
Click to expand...

This is an admission that my statement that OLED is currently expensive is true. Thank you for your agreement.

Burn-in is a non-issue with algorithms. Plasma proved that.
Click to expand...

The fact that burn-in needs to be compensated for makes it an issue.

Excessive saturation a problem??
Click to expand...

Yes, of course it is. I want clear, color accurate images. I don't want oversaturated fake looking excessively processed garbage.
 
5icko said:
Okay that's just a tad bit harsh. lol

I for one and glad Samsung is around. They make some quality products, many at great price points that are affordable for ordinary peasants like myself. And if they weren't competing, LG would continue to demand very high prices for their OLEDs. Here's to hoping Samsung succeeds.
Click to expand...

Yea, I was just being a bit overboard on the subject. It seems people in general have a tendency to "pick a team" when it comes to technology and buy into the whole ignorance is bliss mantra. Currently LG OLED TV's have their drawbacks, primarily in the area of lifespan. Samsung does make a wonderful set of products, I love their phones and hell I believe they have some of the best LCD TV's on the market.

I just have had an issue with TV manufacturers since they moved from just ridiculous claims in their products specifications to flat out renaming the LCD TVs to LED TVs simply because they had an LED backlight. I wish I could say that there was no marketing deception involved in this, but everyone I talked to who weren't super tech savvy just assumed that LED was a whole new technology and far superior to any TV that was still referred as an LCD. Obviously LED backlit TVs are a huge upgrade at this point in time over their generations old CCFL, etc. When they first came out they weren't as significant of an upgrade and more of a marketing ploy.

And now it's happening all over again, QLED is a technology that Samsung is investing heavily into to compete directly with OLED and aging LCD technologies. To take any form of their early development and use it to enhance the backlights of their current LCD lineup is nothing short of amazing, but they are still LCD TVs which will always suffer some drawback in certain areas due to their displays not being phosphorus.

LG's OLED displays will come down in price over time, but production costs of what still a maturing technology is more or less what holds them back from slashing them in a more competitive fashion right now.
 
Id love to have a 40" 4k oled that had good input lag and no burn-in. Would make the perfect monitor, too bad it doesn't exist yet.
 
OLED is the only tech that can comfortably beat my 6 year old pj in the blacks (still on first lamp) . Glad to see LG at least making an effort on improving it. With Sony onboard we might just get the best of both worlds.
 
Tiberian said:
While OLED panels do look great - especially if you can calibrate them as they do tend to be oversatured more often than not - the downside is OLED has a limited lifespan because of their (literal) organic nature. While direct burn-in has been mitigated in many newer models of OLED panels, the fact remains that over time OLED displays dim and just don't look nearly as bright as they do when they're brand new. They literally are "dying" from the moment they're turned on the first time and there's nothing that can prevent that from happening. OLED dies from day one and just gets dimmer over time so for me I don't think I'd ever consider it as a potential TV panel for myself - my Galaxy Note 4 that I just got second-hand for a crazy low price has a SuperAMOLED panel in it and since it's 2 years old (this was one of the very first ones manufactured from November 2014) it has fairly noticeable dimming and some burn-in in various places like the notification bar which is expected. It only really becomes noticeable on brighter backgrounds and having bright colors on an OLED is what causes the accelerated "death" so I tend to keep things darker with wallpapers and shift things around whenever possible but it's not going to last forever, obviously.

Besides, in our disposable society nobody buys such things for really extended periods like days of old meaning years and years of use. Hell, I have a CRT TV here that's probably 20 years old now and I got it from the original owner about 8 years ago, works just fine for me but yes it's big and cumbersome but I haven't moved it from where it sits since I got it. Sure I'd love to have a nice 40-50" panel of some kind on the wall where the TV sits in front of now, would save some space obviously but I don't even watch actual TV all that much anymore because of so much online potential nowadays.
Click to expand...

Every TV is dying from day one. Your CRT does not look as good as it did when it was new. Your LCD has lights that will get darker with age (Fluorescent faster than LED) . I'm not sure how the panel itself ages, but if you work with color, you're calibrating it at least. I had a 20" JVC TV for roughly 20 years (though it was a secondary set after 13). When it was new, it looked awesome. 13 years later, it was OK, but it wasn't close to it's original glory.
 
Meeho said:
Thing is, LCD is shit, so anything is better in comparison. OLED still has more positives than negatives. Not enough to replace my plasma yet, but hopefully it'll get there.

Quantum LED is just a polished turd. Panasonic has something new, but I still have doubts it will solve LCD's biggest problems. More potential than QLED, that's for sure.
Click to expand...


When I saw this discussion from one of the guys working for nanosys, I stopped thinking quantum dot lcds and qled was a turd.






The long term issue for oled is how bright they can get compared to quantum dot tvs, and the real qled that is years out is also supposed to be an emissive display.



It's a bit of a race, can oled get brightness levels high enough before the people working on quantum dots can get production ready qleds that are emissive? We'll see. Problem is still the blue, always the blue.
 
Derfman said:
Yea, I was just being a bit overboard on the subject. It seems people in general have a tendency to "pick a team" when it comes to technology and buy into the whole ignorance is bliss mantra. Currently LG OLED TV's have their drawbacks, primarily in the area of lifespan. Samsung does make a wonderful set of products, I love their phones and hell I believe they have some of the best LCD TV's on the market.

I just have had an issue with TV manufacturers since they moved from just ridiculous claims in their products specifications to flat out renaming the LCD TVs to LED TVs simply because they had an LED backlight. I wish I could say that there was no marketing deception involved in this, but everyone I talked to who weren't super tech savvy just assumed that LED was a whole new technology and far superior to any TV that was still referred as an LCD. Obviously LED backlit TVs are a huge upgrade at this point in time over their generations old CCFL, etc. When they first came out they weren't as significant of an upgrade and more of a marketing ploy.

And now it's happening all over again, QLED is a technology that Samsung is investing heavily into to compete directly with OLED and aging LCD technologies. To take any form of their early development and use it to enhance the backlights of their current LCD lineup is nothing short of amazing, but they are still LCD TVs which will always suffer some drawback in certain areas due to their displays not being phosphorus.

LG's OLED displays will come down in price over time, but production costs of what still a maturing technology is more or less what holds them back from slashing them in a more competitive fashion right now.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm on the the consumer's side.

BTW, it's the ignorant consumer that killed the plasma and stuck us with LCD. They all were brainwashed into thinking early model burn-in was an issue. They would also go into a brightly lit big box store and compare LCD next to plasma and think brighter is better. Dumb. And of course salespeople are no smarter.

Samsung made a 5300b series plasma that was sold for $600 when they were cleared out. As stunning as the venerable 8500 series in a dark room. No joke. I think they must have had 8000 series parts lying around while they were ramping down, creating what they could as sellable TVs and in this case calling it a B model.
 
Brightness, motion clarity/resolution, uniformity (no vignetting, banding etc), color gamut accuracy, greyscale accuracy, lifespan and processing/input lag: it seems I will never buy a TV, lol. I want to see Samsung QLED in person. Insert FED/SED rant here.
 
tybert7 said:
When I saw this discussion from one of the guys working for nanosys, I stopped thinking quantum dot lcds and qled was a turd.






The long term issue for oled is how bright they can get compared to quantum dot tvs, and the real qled that is years out is also supposed to be an emissive display.



It's a bit of a race, can oled get brightness levels high enough before the people working on quantum dots can get production ready qleds that are emissive? We'll see. Problem is still the blue, always the blue.
Click to expand...

It has potential and could surpass OLED (I'm hoping it does), but currently its implementation does make it just a polished LCD aka turd.

Ah, SED, I'll never get over that one.
 
tybert7 said:
When I saw this discussion from one of the guys working for nanosys, I stopped thinking quantum dot lcds and qled was a turd.






The long term issue for oled is how bright they can get compared to quantum dot tvs, and the real qled that is years out is also supposed to be an emissive display.



It's a bit of a race, can oled get brightness levels high enough before the people working on quantum dots can get production ready qleds that are emissive? We'll see. Problem is still the blue, always the blue.
Click to expand...


They can probably just allocate more and more area to blue, and underdrive it to extend life to guarantee a usable lifespan. The truth is as long as they can maintain 80% luminance for a good 5-6 years and can hit the same brightness as LCDs, i don't mind doing the TV shuffle (Living to sitting, sitting to bed..). Right now, with HDR seeming to give a good pop to gaming, I'd go for the brighter LCDs and live with the poorer blacks since I game a lot more than I watch movies, and use the TV a lot during the day so LCD it is.
 
LG seems to be trapped in the "Plasma trap".

Foxconn and Sharp invest 8.8 billion in the same tech as Samsung.
 
Liver said:
When I saw that. WTF. Are they really going to fool people in thinking the "Q" looks like an "O"? They could have named it something else, but purposefully went with Q for marketing. BS.
Click to expand...

You sure?

You do realize you are talking about two Korean companies who's native language is a little different than our own and who markets products to the entire world?

Look at these two pages for Samsung products that have Quantum Dot displays and point out anywhere where they use the term QLED;
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIABHJ55P6752

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889356109

Samsung isn't marketing Quantum Dot as QLED, creative writers are.



The real questions are simple, how well does each perform, and how much do each cost. I am seeing Quantum Dot TVs and monitors coming out that are not really any more expensive then any other products of a new year. The new Samsug 34" 21:9 Quantum Dot Freesync monitor at 100Hz is retailing at $999.00 and that isn't very far off from any of the previous ultra-wides when they first hit store shelves. OLED on the other hand remains much more expensive and as long as LG continues to hold that price point the manufacturing costs will not get lower because of volume sales.

I think LG is being foolish with their pricing and that if they lowered their prices enough to secure greater sales volume that manufacturing costs would drop and they could gain top spot in market share as a result. Now if the costs of manufacture are so high that they just can't drop the prices, then OLED will not drop at all and it will remain the pricey top pick until someone else comes out with a new way to beat OLED that is cheaper and then OLED will die off.

As long as OLED remains at such a high price point OLED is no threat to the market share and profitability of it's competitors. It's like saying that the newest Porsche is going to drive Nissan out of business. I'm not rich, I'd love to have a Porsche but I can't spend that kind of money on one, so I drive a Challenger R/T and enjoy driving it every damn day.
 
Last edited:
lcpiper said:
You sure?

You do realize you are talking about two Korean companies who's native language is a little different than our own and who markets products to the entire world?
Click to expand...

I'm sure. Multinational companies brand their products on the market they are trying to sell to.

The implied confusion is so obvious.

Edit. I'm not making a comment on the quality or expense of the TVs. Just the branding is so deceptive.
 
Tiberian said:
my Galaxy Note 4 that I just got second-hand for a crazy low price has a SuperAMOLED panel in it and since it's 2 years old (this was one of the very first ones manufactured from November 2014) it has fairly noticeable dimming and some burn-in in various places like the notification bar which is expected. It only really becomes noticeable on brighter backgrounds and having bright colors on an OLED is what causes the accelerated "death" so I tend to keep things darker with wallpapers and shift things around whenever possible but it's not going to last forever, obviously.
Click to expand...

Note 4 owner since release date. The display is ridiculously bright even in direct sunlight. I don't have a working laptop so I use the thing constantly and can't see any degradation in the brightness. No burn in whatsoever.

I love the look of plasmas and still have one in my living room. I honestly do not like the picture of LCD's and can't see myself ever buying one. Hoping my plasma holds out until OLED drops in price a bit.

Then again, I preferred my old CRT to LCD before it bit the dust - superior for FPS gaming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blkt
like this
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top