Samsung QLED TV Is the First TV Offering “100 Percent Color Volume”

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
What the heck is color volume? Oh, just the 3D representation of the maximum color-reproduction capabilities of a given display throughout the entire range of brightness levels. If that sounds interesting to you, Samsung has the perfect solution in the form of their QLED TV—but be prepared to shell out $2500 for it. For that much, I would argue that you should just get an OLED TV, especially if you value contrast ratio. Samsung is supposedly working on newer QLED technology that will be emissive, meaning that pixels can be turned completely off, making it a true challenger to OLED. But who knows when that is coming.

…Samsung’s new QLED screen…should result in “more realistic, accurate and vibrant HDR images” on screen, with films and TV shows diplayed “as the director or content producer intended, in both bright and dark scenes”. The Quantum-dot material will hopefully also allow for consistent color quality from any viewing angle, in both brightly lit and dark rooms alike. You can pre-order select Q-series models from the US Samsung page, starting at an eye-watering $2,500. We're still waiting on pricing and release information for Australia and the UK.
 
Color volume...

Poor Samsung, late to the game on the OLED patents trying market their way out.
 
More buzzwords for tired old LCD.

It's funny because on Phones Samsung will tell you OLED is the best thing ever.

But on TVs? Who needs perfect black and great viewing angles on a TV when you can have color volume. :rolleyes:
 
PeaKr said:
2500$, That for a 32" ?
Click to expand...

Samsung was showing $2,500 for a 55 inch screen ($3,500 for 65 inch) of the 2nd best series and $3,500 for a 55 inch screen of the best series. By Thanksgiving 2017 you can expect a $500-$2,500 price drop depending on the model
 
Just let lcd die already. Im going to be pissed if lcd kill off oleds like they did plasmas as peple just want cheep junk tvs.
 
LCD technology has come a long way and the market is damn near 100% saturated with such units. Most people are using sets that are much older than what us tech related guys wouldn't be caught dead with in our house. They've found ways to make their LCD offerings surpass earlier generations time and time again, so of course everyone and their mother looks at these newer "enhanced" LCD TVs with gimmicky names and go all jazz hands over them.

Most if put in front of an OLED and a top Samsung LCD would choose the OLED for picture quality, but not until they see the price difference. Now thanks to Samsung finding a new way to rename LCD err oh wait no I mean LED TVs into QLED TVs people will be once again be left confused.

Most people I talk to believe LCD TVs are a technology of the past and were replaced by LED TVs. Brand confusion has worked out in their favor before, lets see how it does contending with OLED at a higher price point. My money is sadly on Samsung, though my heart is with LG and any other manufacturer who jumps onto the OLED bandwagon.
 
It still annoys me that they are calling them "QLED". I thought QLEDs were supposed to all be emissive? Now it's just another marketing term. What will emissive QLEDS be called? SQLEDs or EQLEDS? Ugh!
 
I am still totally in love with my Sony 55" w905a QLED TV, from 2013.

Oh yes, forgot to mention that QLED is not new, and is good old fashioned LED Backlight with Quantum Dot coated LEDs, as used in many TVs from many brands for well over 5 years. It is not a Samsung technology, it's from a company called QD Vision, who Samsung acquired a very short time ago. It did not take them many months to rewrite history.

This technology is obsolete in the high end already, due to OLED, and next year will be obsolete in the mid range too, due to new OLED tech filtering down to lower cost units.

Congrats Samsung.
 
Most people just don't care. Size and price are the most important factor to them. People camp out for those crappy cheap TV for black Friday all the time and think they are actually getting a deal. My mom still has a old 1080i projection TV that's like 15 years old. She is perfectly happy with it and won't even spend $300 on a new TV. Many times I'm at work and talking to people excited about that new 65" TV they just bought. I ask them what they got and they will just tell me the brand. Which turns out to be some cheap ass Sharp or something.
 
I'm sitting this race out, too much tech happening too fast.
1080p pj still rocks, happy enough.
Espesh with the Fallout 4 UHD texture pack, that looks great even at 1080p!

But I had a fantastic system crash playing it last night when my "Windows" decided it wanted to close due to lack of resources.
Yet 6GB of the 16GB was still free.
However my swapfile was disabled so turned it back on.

Jeez, must still be drunk from last night, I'm typing crap as well as talking it now lol ...
 
My question is, how do you hang a curved TV on the wall and make it look good?
 
I'm sorry, but oled are way too vivid. LCD 4k seems to be about right as far as price goes. I just picked up the 799 LG 65 4k right before the Superbowl. It's fantastic and looks as good as the Sony 830d which is twice the cost. Samsung just seem to be so far over priced.
My only complaint, I don't like the feet on the LG. My old 55 inch had a nice center base.
I'll have to do a bit of reengineering to get the TV above my sound bar.

I'm thinking I will probably just joint and plane a couple of 8 quarter pieces of oak, glue them into 16 quarter blanks and use them as feet extensions.
 
Nice but I love my LG OLED. Still, can't go wrong with Samsung or LG. Best TV brands out there IMHO.
 
Nukester said:
My question is, how do you hang a curved TV on the wall and make it look good?
Click to expand...
You dont, stick it on a desk for 1 on 1 use.
Mfrs are stopping doing curved now because it doesnt make much sense for multiple people unless on cinema/projector scale.

I suppose you could recess it into a wall or make a surround for it so it looks recessed.
 
Last edited:
I'm too cheap to buy one because there isn't anything that they offer that is worth double / triple the price of an LCD. They are simply too bright for me and too expensive. 799 for a TV is a lot, 2500 is stupid ridiculous. However, you spend your money on what ever you want.

Snowdog said:
Sorry but that is just nonsense.

Cell Phone OLED and TV OLEDs are different. There is no reason for excess saturation/vivid on TV based OLEDs. There are quite nice right out of the box:
http://www.digitaltrends.com/tv-reviews/lg-65ef9500-review/

The too vivid claim, is usually sour grapes from someone who is too cheap to buy an OLED.
Click to expand...
 
Jarod888 said:
I'm too cheap to buy one because there isn't anything that they offer that is worth double / triple the price of an LCD. They are simply too bright for me and too expensive. 799 for a TV is a lot, 2500 is stupid ridiculous. However, you spend your money on what ever you want.
Click to expand...

They get their high contrast ratio from better dark detail because each cell can dim to nothing, not from being brighter.
Even if they were too bright, there is this thing called brightness you can change.

You dont know what you are talking about.
 
Fine. I can mess with the settings, I still see no need to spend that kind of money on a TV and I watch a lot, 50 to 60 hours, of TV a week.

I don't care for oled, they are too bright to me, over saturated, too intense, etc. Also, I don't like how thin they are. I have a large, wall covering entertainment center and the TV looks weird when it is that thin and doesn't "fill" the space.

Hanging a TV on the wall is stupid looking.

Nenu said:
They get their high contrast ratio from better dark detail because each cell can dim to nothing, not from being brighter.
Even if they were too bright, there is this thing called brightness you can change.

You dont know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...
 
Jarod888 said:
I don't care for oled, they are too bright to me, over saturated, too intense, etc.
Click to expand...

LCD sets are brighter...

Professional calibrators have found factory settings to be remarkably accurate when it comes to color reproduction in the LG OLEDs. In other words, there is no over-saturation.
 
Stimpy88 said:
I am still totally in love with my Sony 55" w905a QLED TV, from 2013.

Oh yes, forgot to mention that QLED is not new, and is good old fashioned LED Backlight with Quantum Dot coated LEDs, as used in many TVs from many brands for well over 5 years. It is not a Samsung technology, it's from a company called QD Vision, who Samsung acquired a very short time ago. It did not take them many months to rewrite history.

This technology is obsolete in the high end already, due to OLED, and next year will be obsolete in the mid range too, due to new OLED tech filtering down to lower cost units.

Congrats Samsung.
Click to expand...


Your Bravia is just an edge-lit LCD, not QLED. Completely different technologies here.

Also, feel free to correct me, but I'm not aware of any other device / TV using QLED tech. So I'm uncertain what all of these TVs are that you're talking about that use it. I searched Google from 2010 to 2016 and there isn't one result. The only thing that I can find is that some light bulbs use this tech currently.


I for one am not totally sold on QLED, yet, but I'm totally sold on OLED... especially after seeing it at CES in what, 2013 or 2014?? Once I'm ready to upgrade my TV in the basement, I'll likely be going OLED... but I have to wait for the 70-80-inch range to actually be reasonably affordable. The TV that I'll be replacing cost me $2300 back in 2008 (Samsung LN46A650) and is wonderful, but I'm getting ready for something bigger.
 
That's fine. I don't like them. I could care less if they are perfectly calibrated. I simply don't like the way they look. If you want to spend 3 times on an oled vrs an lcd, fine. I'm not going to.
I don't think they add any value.

Doppleherz said:
LCD sets are brighter...

Professional calibrators have found factory settings to be remarkably accurate when it comes to color reproduction in the LG OLEDs. In other words, there is no over-saturation.
Click to expand...
 
Jarod888 said:
That's fine. I don't like them. I could care less if they are perfectly calibrated. I simply don't like the way they look. If you want to spend 3 times on an oled vrs an lcd, fine. I'm not going to.
I don't think they add any value.
Click to expand...
You care about calibration but dont like the way it looks.
Confused much?
 
No. I set it up to what looks good to me, whether or not that is in alignment with the calibration or not.

I don't care about calibration from the factory, as long as it isn't too bright, or over saturated and I like what it looks like, I'm good.

Basically, I bring it home, run through the factory settings and pick the one that I like. (It's usually standard.) I turn off any eco settings and ensure that it can't connect to a network and I'm done. I just don't see the point of spending hours getting it perfect, as long as it isn't washed out, not too bright, etc. I'm happy.

Nenu said:
You care about calibration but dont like the way it looks.
Confused much?
Click to expand...
 
Jarod888 said:
No. I set it up to what looks good to me, whether or not that is in alignment with the calibration or not.

I don't care about calibration from the factory, as long as it isn't too bright, or over saturated and I like what it looks like, I'm good.

Basically, I bring it home, run through the factory settings and pick the one that I like. (It's usually standard.) I turn off any eco settings and ensure that it can't connect to a network and I'm done. I just don't see the point of spending hours getting it perfect, as long as it isn't washed out, not too bright, etc. I'm happy.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why you are here telling us how you dont like watching media the way it was intended.
 
Nenu said:
I'm not sure why you are here telling us how you dont like watching media the way it was intended.
Click to expand...
I'm just telling you how I like it. I don't care how you like it.
I'm telling you because I'm not the only one out there that doesn't like oled, and what looks good to some, looks awful to others. To each there own.
 
Jarod888 said:
I'm just telling you how I like it. I don't care how you like it.
I'm telling you because I'm not the only one out there that doesn't like oled, and what looks good to some, looks awful to others. To each there own.
Click to expand...
lol, thats funny.
You came here saying how you dont like things.
Its us that dont care.
We corrected the rubbish you posted.
 
NAiLs said:
Your Bravia is just an edge-lit LCD, not QLED. Completely different technologies here.

Also, feel free to correct me, but I'm not aware of any other device / TV using QLED tech. So I'm uncertain what all of these TVs are that you're talking about that use it. I searched Google from 2010 to 2016 and there isn't one result. The only thing that I can find is that some light bulbs use this tech currently.
Click to expand...

Actually you are incorrect.

His TV is a Quantum Dot Sony model from 2013:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/sony-bravia-kdl-55w905-review

You need to remember that QLED is just Samsungs marketing BS. So don't search for that, search for Quantum Dots.

Sony has been doing this (exact same QDot tech as Samsung) since 2013, but since they didn't try to mislead people into thinking it was some new emissive technology like OLED, few people noticed.
 
Nenu said:
lol, thats funny.
You came here saying how you dont like things.
Its us that dont care.
We corrected the rubbish you posted.
Click to expand...
It's not rubbish, I don't like oled. Not liking something because of perception is perfectly acceptable.
I perceive them to be too bright, too over saturated and I don't like them because of those reasons, which are perfectly valid.
Simply put, looking at them (oled) hurts my eyes, looking at an LCD does not, so that's what I went with.
 
Jarod888 said:
It's not rubbish, I don't like oled. Not liking something because of perception is perfectly acceptable.
I perceive them to be too bright, too over saturated and I don't like them because of those reasons, which are perfectly valid.
Simply put, looking at them (oled) hurts my eyes, looking at an LCD does not, so that's what I went with.
Click to expand...

Your argument is just absurd sour grapes.

You say OLED is too bright, but the major advantage LCDs have over OLED is that LCD is brighter. Not being bright enough is often listed as a Con for OLED.

Your Too Saturated claims are likewise nonsense. OLED TVs arrive accurate out of the box. Accurate doesn't look over saturated. You might have seen an old OLED phone, or Display model in Super Vivid mode, but that complaint is also meaningless.

No one is trying to convince you to spend more money on OLED, but correct your attacks which are at best, based on Ignorance.

But since we have corrected your ignorance, it looks more like trolling if you continue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nenu
like this
Until OLED gets brighter, is just like Plasma - dead to me. Yes the contrast ratio is great. But watching winter sports, or hockey, its like space movies on poor LCDs - A gray mess.
 
tunatime said:
Just let lcd die already. Im going to be pissed if lcd kill off oleds like they did plasmas as peple just want cheep junk tvs.
Click to expand...

It's not the consumer, its the manufacturer. The consumer will buy the best in their price range, its up to the manufacturer to make viable options in the given price bracket.
 
Snowdog said:
Your argument is just absurd sour grapes.

You say OLED is too bright, but the major advantage LCDs have over OLED is that LCD is brighter. Not being bright enough is often listed as a Con for OLED.

Your Too Saturated claims are likewise nonsense. OLED TVs arrive accurate out of the box. Accurate doesn't look over saturated. You might have seen an old OLED phone, or Display model in Super Vivid mode, but that complaint is also meaningless.

No one is trying to convince you to spend more money on OLED, but correct your attacks which are at best, based on Ignorance.

But since we have corrected your ignorance, it looks more like trolling if you continue.
Click to expand...

Fine. I don't like the way the look. In bestbuy where I bought my TV a week ago, I spent a lot of time looking at the various models on the floor; now I realize that bb may have reps and such which try to make their displays the best, so maybe bb isn't a fair comparison. I looked at all the different oled, LCD, led, what ever they had. I didn't like a single oled, or any of the Samsung models. They were too intense, to me that was brightness and over saturation. They were too vivid, they looked fake to me. I really liked 3 of the LCD ones. The Sony 830d, the visio m model an an LG one. It came down to price, 2-3 weeks pre- Superbowl the were 1499, 1699 (70 inch) and 1299. That was too much, so I waited until the week of the Superbowl and the LG one went down to 799. I bought it on the spot. I liked the Sony the best of all three. But it wasn't worth an extra 600$ (dropped to 1399).

None of the Samsung or LG oled's were even considered. They were too expensive from the start, plus the fact that I didn't like the way they looked.

I may have in previous posts mistermed my reasons for disliking oled, I was just trying to convey that I didn't like them because they were too "something" to me.

I am super happy with the LG TV I have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top