Looking for a new TV, looking g for advice

[plenzmd1]

10 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

I laugh at the 4K and beyond sets, as the world has still not fully graduated to HD yet! 

 

I have NHL center ice to watch the Sabres; the games are only available in low definition, which, on a 46" LED flat screen is like watching an old VHS recording that has been over-recorded 100 times.  The picture quality almost makes it impossible to watch the games.  

 

Most of my TV channels (I have about 10 million) (Comcast cable) are still regular def and not HD too.

 

When is everything going to be HD?

 

 

 

If you really like to watch hockey, you should investigate getting Directv. Can't remember the last time I watched a game in Standard Def, maybe 8-10 years ago? I have seen this complaint from Center Ice subscribers on cable providers, but never on DTV.

 

And in this thread, this post reminded me when I was first really researching buying an HD TV in maybe 2003.It was way more important to compare how the TV did with standard def, as only about 10% of ALL content was in HD, including sports. Had to force stores to switch on cable instead of their HD content..they wanted you to think if you bought the TV everything would be in HD..and the honest sales guys would tell ya so many people would return a TV when they realized hardly anything was in HD.

 

BTW, I was SOOOOOO proud of the fact I was not an early adopter and waited jumping into the HD pool till I got a screaming deal on 46" in DLP for only $4200!!!!!! I mean the idiots buying Plasmas were paying $10K..how much lower than $4200 could TVs go right? 

[mrags]

5 hours ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

I've been looking at TV's lately too and all of these are way out of my price range. I also like to hold out until the technology I feel is really sorted out, which has it positives and negatives. I've learned from it in my opinion, especially at this point, it's better to be a little bit behind than ahead. I've had the PS2 and the HDTV as a teenager, back when their was like 6 games to play as a PS2 and I only wanted 2. And the 2 just had terrible bugs, or I bought the HDTV before everyone was broadcasting in HD before it was worth it. It's almost better to be late I've learned.

 

To the OP, Most channels don't broadcast in 4k I believe. The refresh rates are not fast enough, and in most of the TV's, even though the one's you are researching are beyond my price point, they don't really give you the full quality of 4k. I think if you can hold off a year or two, and buy a new TV then you'll get better value. Especially if your next move is 4k, which is mine. I could be completely wrong, I'm pretty tech savvy but no expert. I've talked to a couple people who know more than me, and as recent as 6 months they agreed with me. Even though they have both bought 4k TV's since then....

You are correct. More channels do not broadcast in 4k. But as I previously said in the post, I watch a ton it TV. If I’m watching a movie, I’m buying it. I own well over 500 DVD’s and BluRays. I will just buy 4k movies going forward. And there is more and more 4k content every day. 

 

If you wait wait until the technology is mainstream and is played more regularly, that’s fine. I am in need of a new TV and want the best one on the market for my money so that it lasts me another 10 years like my last one, which wasn’t one of the best TVs when it came out and I regretted it within a short period of time. 

 

 

[mrags]

I’d like to add this to anyone that is stating the upgrade and technology are not worth it. It’s all a matter of opinion and need. Yes of course all 4k TVs will go down in price in the near future. If I waited until next year I’m sure I could have any one of these TVs for about $1000 less or more. However by that rationale I’d have to keep waiting and waiting because next year a new technology will be out and then I’ll be waiting until those TVs go down in price. And the cycle just keeps going on and on. As it is, almost every large screen tv for sale in stores now are all 4k. When stores are only selling 4k, it means the cable companies are right around the corner from much more broadcasting. 

 

Also, LED 4k TVs have been around for a while now and the tech hasn’t exactly stopped moving forward but it’s hardly going anywhere. Unless you go with OLED which is most likely the next new tv tech because of their perfect blacks. And I’ll say this, if you don’t believe it, and haven’t seen it for yourself, you should head to Best Buy or some other video store and check them out side by side and you will see that not all TVs are the same. I dare anyone to look at an OLED and not be in awe of the perfect black levels and clarity, especially compared to an LED. Now if it’s actually worth it to that person to spend an extra 1-2k on it is another thing altogether. 

 

[Best Player Available]

21 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

I laugh at the 4K and beyond sets, as the world has still not fully graduated to HD yet! 

 

I have NHL center ice to watch the Sabres; the games are only available in low definition, which, on a 46" LED flat screen is like watching an old VHS recording that has been over-recorded 100 times.  The picture quality almost makes it impossible to watch the games.  

 

Most of my TV channels (I have about 10 million) (Comcast cable) are still regular def and not HD too.

 

When is everything going to be HD?

 

 

I believe you are misinformed or owner of a rare prototype. LED TV's are not in commercial production. Reason being LED engineering issues. What I think you meant to say was regarding your 46" LED flat screen is this. What you are describing is a LCD screen Backlit with LED's. This advance was made many years ago eliminating noisy unreliable flourescent lamps with LED's. OLEDS are closer too what you describe but still are not conventional LED'S

[Augie]

I can’t imagine reading all this as the little kid who grew up with one black and white TV with three channels, having to cross the room to put Commander Tom on the dial and adjust the rabbit ears. If I knew all this was coming, I might have exploded! I wanted to be President so I could have a color TV in every room. 

[mrags]

1 hour ago, Augie said:

I can’t imagine reading all this as the little kid who grew up with one black and white TV with three channels, having to cross the room to put Commander Tom on the dial and adjust the rabbit ears. If I knew all this was coming, I might have exploded! I wanted to be President so I could have a color TV in every room. 

Oh the priveledges of being the President. 

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, mrags said:

Oh the priveledges of being the President. 

 

Well, I also wanted to be a garbage man so I could ride on the back of the truck, so....

[mrags]

2 hours ago, Augie said:

 

Well, I also wanted to be a garbage man so I could ride on the back of the truck, so....

You are all over the place 

[Ol Dirty B]

14 hours ago, mrags said:

I’d like to add this to anyone that is stating the upgrade and technology are not worth it. It’s all a matter of opinion and need. Yes of course all 4k TVs will go down in price in the near future. If I waited until next year I’m sure I could have any one of these TVs for about $1000 less or more. However by that rationale I’d have to keep waiting and waiting because next year a new technology will be out and then I’ll be waiting until those TVs go down in price. And the cycle just keeps going on and on. As it is, almost every large screen tv for sale in stores now are all 4k. When stores are only selling 4k, it means the cable companies are right around the corner from much more broadcasting. 

 

Also, LED 4k TVs have been around for a while now and the tech hasn’t exactly stopped moving forward but it’s hardly going anywhere. Unless you go with OLED which is most likely the next new tv tech because of their perfect blacks. And I’ll say this, if you don’t believe it, and haven’t seen it for yourself, you should head to Best Buy or some other video store and check them out side by side and you will see that not all TVs are the same. I dare anyone to look at an OLED and not be in awe of the perfect black levels and clarity, especially compared to an LED. Now if it’s actually worth it to that person to spend an extra 1-2k on it is another thing altogether. 

 

 

I agree with this. I was just giving you my experience. I completely agree, if you're getting a new tv it might as well be 4k. I did the same thing as what you're talking about here. Back in 08 I bought a nice Sony for like 1500 and it's still kicking ok.

[plenzmd1]

14 hours ago, Augie said:

I can’t imagine reading all this as the little kid who grew up with one black and white TV with three channels, having to cross the room to put Commander Tom on the dial and adjust the rabbit ears. If I knew all this was coming, I might have exploded! I wanted to be President so I could have a color TV in every room. 

 

Cmon, that was in your teens no? As a youth, you watched Howdy Doody right?

[/dev/null]

Don't skimp on the HDMI ports and don't let any of the SmartTV features cloud your judgement.  Apps are always evolving and eventually your TV won't support some new version.  You'll end up having to supplement any built in apps with a Roku, FireTV, AndroidTV, etc at some point anyway

[Virgil]

Without going into all the technical reasons why, just get a Samsung. Only get the 120hz, you’ll just turn off the noise reduction anyways. 

 

Easy explanation - better screen, truer colors, better to calibrate. 

 

13 years or experience. Just trust me. 

 

Get the cheapest 4K you can with the 120. You won’t regret it. 

 

Also, buy a sound bar. Klipsch will do nicely. 

[mrags]

23 hours ago, Virgil said:

Without going into all the technical reasons why, just get a Samsung. Only get the 120hz, you’ll just turn off the noise reduction anyways. 

 

Easy explanation - better screen, truer colors, better to calibrate. 

 

13 years or experience. Just trust me. 

 

Get the cheapest 4K you can with the 120. You won’t regret it. 

 

Also, buy a sound bar. Klipsch will do nicely. 

I’ve done too much research on all of them to accept “just buy X” and leave it at that.

 

Get into your reasons. Especially Considering any review I’ve see says the OLEDs are the best TVs every produced and not a single review shows the Samsung’s come anywhere near them. 

 

Like I’ve stated already I can get a sick deal on a Samsung QLED that makes it worth the consideration for me. But I’d love to know why you say this. 

 

And what experience do you have? Like are you just person that has owned a Samsung for 13 years? Did you work at Best Buy or something? 

[BillsFan4]

https://www.sony.com/electronics/tv/t/televisions

 

Prices are out on the 2018 Sony lineup. All except the A8F.

 

That price on the new x900f is enticing. But it makes me think that it is a downgrade on the current x930e. I want to say that was 2x as much when it hit the market this time last year. 

 

So so I emailed Sony to ask. They were not overly helpful, and didn't go into any detail but they claimed that the 900f is indeed an upgrade on the x930. I am still not so sure of that, though.

 

I am going to try and do some digging because I want to grab an x930e if it is a better tv than the new x900f, since it looks like they are doing away with the 930 series all together.

 

Heres the side by side spec comparison of the 900f and 930e -

 

https://www.sony.com/electronics/tv/t/televisions?view=compare

 

I already mentioned the backlight is different. Direct LED vs edgelit slim backlight on the 930 (which Sony claimed just last year was better than their direct LED on the 900). 

 

Also the motion processor. The 900 has x-motion clarity and the 930 has Motion Flow xr960. No idea which is better. Do you? 

 

I also notice here that the 930 has XDR PRO Contrast 10x, and the 900 has XDR pro contrast 6x (last year's 900 had 5x) so that's a step down on the new 900. 

 

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/compare?skus=5714432,6179727&productString=*&url=%2Fsite%2Fsearchpage.jsp%3Fcp%3D3%26searchType%3Dsearch%26_dyncharset%3DUTF-8%26ks%3D960%26sc%3DGlobal%26list%3Dy%26usc%3DAll%20Categories%26type%3Dpage%26id%3Dpcat17071%26iht%3Dn%26seeAll%3D%26browsedCategory%3Dpcmcat333800050003%26st%3Dpcmcat333800050003_categoryid%24abcat0101001%26qp%3Dverticalresolution_facet%3DResolution~2160p%20(4K)%26sp%3D-currentprice%20skuidsaas

 

I am going to take a ride to Best Buy or Speaker shop this week and talk to someone. 

Id like to see both side by side but I'm not sure if they'll continue displaying the 2017 models once the 2018 models hit the stores in a couple weeks. Probably depends on how many 2017 models they have left in stock. 

[mrags]

17 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

https://www.sony.com/electronics/tv/t/televisions

 

Prices are out on the 2018 Sony lineup. All except the A8F.

 

That price on the new x900f is enticing. But it makes me think that it is a downgrade on the current x930e. I want to say that was 2x as much when it hit the market this time last year. 

 

So so I emailed Sony to ask. They were not overly helpful, and didn't go into any detail but they claimed that the 900f is indeed an upgrade on the x930. I am still not so sure of that, though.

 

I am going to try and do some digging because I want to grab an x930e if it is a better tv than the new x900f, since it looks like they are doing away with the 930 series all together.

 

Heres the side by side spec comparison of the 900f and 930e -

 

https://www.sony.com/electronics/tv/t/televisions?view=compare

 

I already mentioned the backlight is different. Direct LED vs edgelit slim backlight on the 930 (which Sony claimed just last year was better than their direct LED on the 900). 

 

Also the motion processor. The 900 has x-motion clarity and the 930 has Motion Flow xr960. No idea which is better. Do you? 

 

I also notice here that the 930 has XDR PRO Contrast 10x, and the 900 has XDR pro contrast 6x (last year's 900 had 5x) so that's a step down on the new 900. 

 

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/compare?skus=5714432,6179727&productString=*&url=%2Fsite%2Fsearchpage.jsp%3Fcp%3D3%26searchType%3Dsearch%26_dyncharset%3DUTF-8%26ks%3D960%26sc%3DGlobal%26list%3Dy%26usc%3DAll%20Categories%26type%3Dpage%26id%3Dpcat17071%26iht%3Dn%26seeAll%3D%26browsedCategory%3Dpcmcat333800050003%26st%3Dpcmcat333800050003_categoryid%24abcat0101001%26qp%3Dverticalresolution_facet%3DResolution~2160p%20(4K)%26sp%3D-currentprice%20skuidsaas

 

I am going to take a ride to Best Buy or Speaker shop this week and talk to someone. 

Id like to see both side by side but I'm not sure if they'll continue displaying the 2017 models once the 2018 models hit the stores in a couple weeks. Probably depends on how many 2017 models they have left in stock. 

Thanks,

 

to my knowledge, the 900f will take the place of the 900e, and the 930e. It will be backlit which is better. No clue why it doesn’t include the 940e as well. The 940e I believe has all the same options. 

 

What sucks is is that I really want to know what the price on the A8 is going to be and it’s the only tv on that list where the pricing is not available. Technically it’s supposed to be the same as the A1 without the 5 degree slant and without the 4” sub in the stand. So you would think it’s less than the 65” A1 but knowing Sony, you will pay more for less because people didn’t like the slant. 

 

Stereo Advantage has all the Sony’s on display. And it shows clear differences between all of them. I believe the 930e and the A1 are side by side there with the LG opposite side of the room in clear view. 

 

Imo the Full Array Local Dimming on the 900f vs 900-930e is the big difference and it’s a huge upgrade for the 900f. All of them have amazing color and brightness but without seeing it, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the (FALD) is going to produce much blacker blacks. They are touting it as the best possible blacks other than the OLED or the Z9D

Edited February 27, 2018 by mrags

[Steptide]

Samsung's customer service kinda sucks. They treated me like an unwanted step child when I had an issue with my 65inch Samsung smart TV. I hear the oled tvs have the best picture, but I've always heard they're vulnerable to burn in. 

Edited February 27, 2018 by Steptide

[BillsFan4]

1 hour ago, mrags said:Thanks,

 

to my knowledge, the 900f will take the place of the 900e, and the 930e. It will be backlit which is better. No clue why it doesn’t include the 940e as well. The 940e I believe has all the same options. 

 

What sucks is is that I really want to know what the price on the A8 is going to be and it’s the only tv on that list where the pricing is not available. Technically it’s supposed to be the same as the A1 without the 5 degree slant and without the 4” sub in the stand. So you would think it’s less than the 65” A1 but knowing Sony, you will pay more for less because people didn’t like the slant. 

 

Stereo Advantage has all the Sony’s on display. And it shows clear differences between all of them. I believe the 930e and the A1 are side by side there with the LG opposite side of the room in clear view. 

 

Imo the Full Array Local Dimming on the 900f vs 900-930e is the big difference and it’s a huge upgrade for the 900f. All of them have amazing color and brightness but without seeing it, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the (FALD) is going to produce much blacker blacks. They are touting it as the best possible blacks other than the OLED or the Z9D

 

Thanks for the info man. 

 

Im not so sure the direct LED backlight is truly an upgrade. You would think it would be.

 

But what's throwing me off is the 2017 900e had that directLED backlight, and they claimed that the slim backlight on the 930 produced a better picture quality on the 930, which is why they went with that over the directLED backlight. 

 

So they were either lying lying about that, or it really was an upgrade but in order to make this new 900f cheaper, they went with the same backlight as the 900e has. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do believe the a8f is going to be cheaper than the A1E. At least that's what I read. 

 

 

As much as I really want an OLED, I am thinking more and more that I will go with LED. But im still not sure.  

 

I've been doing some research on the burn in and image retention issues ever since we last talked, and there definitely does seem to be an issue with image retention, and in some cases burn in too, depending on how you use the TV. It really has me nervous to buy an OLED now. 

 

It it sounds like burn in and image retention is something that you have to actively mitigate against, similar to plasma Tv's (making sure you don't leave screens paused too long, running varied colors and content etc). 

 

 

I also read that there were multiple issues with gaming on LG OLED's (not as sure on Sony, as they haven't been out as long althoug I have seen issues being reported on Sony OLED too). 

 

heres an article about some of the issues on the LG OLED's - 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/02/24/angry-gamers-report-more-problems-with-lg-oled-tvs/#2e5f18321014

 

And one on the burn in  (notice the last line of the article) -

 

http://televisions.reviewed.com/features/what-to-know-about-oled-screen-burn-in-problems-causes-image-retention

 

Image retention seems to be a bigger issue than actual burn in, but still it makes me nervous. 

 

Heres rtings test results in image retention. The Sony A1E scor s 2nd to last out of 42 TVs (mind you, many are LEDs being tested) - check out the comments section too. 

 

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/image-retention-burn-in

 

seems that image retention starts in as little as 10 minutes or less of certain images being displayed. 

 

I will be using my TV for heavy gaming and I'm just not sure the OLED is the right choice for that. The more reading I do, the more comfused I get though... some swear by OLEDs for gaming and other say they've had all sorts of issues. 

The OLED's must look so amazing, it's hard to pass them over. But I don't want to have to constantly baby it either. 

[mrags]

1 hour ago, BillsFan4 said:

 

Thanks for the info man. 

 

Im not so sure the direct LED backlight is truly an upgrade. You would think it would be.

 

But what's throwing me off is the 2017 900e had that directLED backlight, and they claimed that the slim backlight on the 930 produced a better picture quality on the 930, which is why they went with that over the directLED backlight. 

 

So they were either lying lying about that, or it really was an upgrade but in order to make this new 900f cheaper, they went with the same backlight as the 900e has. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I do believe the a8f is going to be cheaper than the A1E. At least that's what I read. 

 

 

As much as I really want an OLED, I am thinking more and more that I will go with LED. But im still not sure.  

 

I've been doing some research on the burn in and image retention issues ever since we last talked, and there definitely does seem to be an issue with image retention, and in some cases burn in too, depending on how you use the TV. It really has me nervous to buy an OLED now. 

 

It it sounds like burn in and image retention is something that you have to actively mitigate against, similar to plasma Tv's (making sure you don't leave screens paused too long, running varied colors and content etc). 

 

 

I also read that there were multiple issues with gaming on LG OLED's (not as sure on Sony, as they haven't been out as long althoug I have seen issues being reported on Sony OLED too). 

 

heres an article about some of the issues on the LG OLED's - 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/02/24/angry-gamers-report-more-problems-with-lg-oled-tvs/#2e5f18321014

 

And one on the burn in  (notice the last line of the article) -

 

http://televisions.reviewed.com/features/what-to-know-about-oled-screen-burn-in-problems-causes-image-retention

 

Image retention seems to be a bigger issue than actual burn in, but still it makes me nervous. 

 

Heres rtings test results in image retention. The Sony A1E scor s 2nd to last out of 42 TVs (mind you, many are LEDs being tested) - check out the comments section too. 

 

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/image-retention-burn-in

 

seems that image retention starts in as little as 10 minutes or less of certain images being displayed. 

 

I will be using my TV for heavy gaming and I'm just not sure the OLED is the right choice for that. The more reading I do, the more comfused I get though... some swear by OLEDs for gaming and other say they've had all sorts of issues. 

The OLED's must look so amazing, it's hard to pass them over. But I don't want to have to constantly baby it either. 

The 930 and 940 were upgrades from the 900. The 930 came in 65” and the 940 was 75”. To my knowledge that was the only difference other than the backlit screen. In my opinion, the new 900F eliminates a one of the lines. They knew the edge lit was not as good and just decided to carry it on all TVs. Just go to Best Buy and look at their displays, I guarantee you will see a difference between the 900 and the 930 and the 940. 

 

Like insaod about the A8. technically OT should be cheaper than the A1 because it is exactly the same tv without the sub and picture frame stand. But I just like Sony will make it either more expensive, or at the least, the same price. Which essentially means you are paying more or the same for less. 

 

Ive read the stories about the burn in and image retention with the OLEDs and it scares me too. I read that Reviewed article weeks ago and the same things worry me. 

 

I dont remember what games you play but I play Madden and Call of Duty and the HID, Mini Map, clock management bar, and score bar worries the hell out of me. And because of that, unless the A8 can be had for $3k or less, I think I’m going with LED. Well, actually the QLED Samsung. It goes against what I want to do. Looking at them all side by side it’s probably on par with the 900e or so. With the 930, 940, Z9D, and oled all superior. But the price tag is steering my ship right now. I can afford to get any of them, but paying $4k for the Sony 940e, or 900f in the 75” when I can get the QLED in a 75” for $2300 is making me think it’s not worth it. At the end of the day, whatever tv I go with, will be significantly better than what I’m using right now. And most likely, my eyes can’t decipher the difference anyway. Maybe in the store, side by side you can see a difference but at home in my living room I don’t know it will matter. 

 

Besides, the only other tv I really want is the OLED, and for a smaller tv it just doesn’t seem worth it. Has burn in issues, isn’t as bright in bright rooms with lots of sunlight. The LED and QLED are much better in those regards. Unless I’m going with the Z9D but I’m not spending that kind of money on a 65” that’s not OLED. 

 

what gaming system do you have and what games do you play?

[BillsFan4]

10 hours ago, mrags said:

The 930 and 940 were upgrades from the 900. The 930 came in 65” and the 940 was 75”. To my knowledge that was the only difference other than the backlit screen. In my opinion, the new 900F eliminates a one of the lines. They knew the edge lit was not as good and just decided to carry it on all TVs. Just go to Best Buy and look at their displays, I guarantee you will see a difference between the 900 and the 930 and the 940. 

 

Like insaod about the A8. technically OT should be cheaper than the A1 because it is exactly the same tv without the sub and picture frame stand. But I just like Sony will make it either more expensive, or at the least, the same price. Which essentially means you are paying more or the same for less. 

 

Ive read the stories about the burn in and image retention with the OLEDs and it scares me too. I read that Reviewed article weeks ago and the same things worry me. 

 

I dont remember what games you play but I play Madden and Call of Duty and the HID, Mini Map, clock management bar, and score bar worries the hell out of me. And because of that, unless the A8 can be had for $3k or less, I think I’m going with LED. Well, actually the QLED Samsung. It goes against what I want to do. Looking at them all side by side it’s probably on par with the 900e or so. With the 930, 940, Z9D, and oled all superior. But the price tag is steering my ship right now. I can afford to get any of them, but paying $4k for the Sony 940e, or 900f in the 75” when I can get the QLED in a 75” for $2300 is making me think it’s not worth it. At the end of the day, whatever tv I go with, will be significantly better than what I’m using right now. And most likely, my eyes can’t decipher the difference anyway. Maybe in the store, side by side you can see a difference but at home in my living room I don’t know it will matter. 

 

Besides, the only other tv I really want is the OLED, and for a smaller tv it just doesn’t seem worth it. Has burn in issues, isn’t as bright in bright rooms with lots of sunlight. The LED and QLED are much better in those regards. Unless I’m going with the Z9D but I’m not spending that kind of money on a 65” that’s not OLED. 

 

what gaming system do you have and what games do you play?

Here man - I just found this article. You were right. The A8F is indeed more expensive than the A1E. Instead of removing the subwoofer, Sony put 2 smaller subwoofers in it. Maybe that's why? 

 

The 55" is $2999 and the 65" is $3999. $12,999 for the 70"! Wow! 

The A1E will actually be the cheaper model, at $2799 for the 55" and $3499 for a 65". 

 

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1518172637

 

sounds like that qled is your best bet for the price. Then just revisit the oled's later down the line when the technology has improved.

 

Or just wait for Samsung's Micro LED technology that will be coming out. Maybe it'll be an improvement over OLED? 

 

 

 

 

Also, on the x900e from last year (I know you are not getting a Sony LED, but I think I am, so I was just looking for your help/opinion again) - 

 

https://www.sony.com/electronics/televisions/xbr-x900e-series/specifications

 

Here are the specs on the 2017 model x900e. It definitely had the directLED (full array) backlight. But all the models lower than this one had the edge lit LED (not the local dimming slim backlight edge LED the 930 had though). 

 

Its just throwing me off that they used that slim backlight on the 930, and used the full array on the lower 900 model, yet called the slim edgelight on the 930 an upgrade over the full array on the 900. I am probably just overthinking it. 

 

Did you you say that stereo advantage has the 930 on display? They usually know their stuff pretty well there. I am going to try and rid there this week I think. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as what gaming system I have, I actually have a PS4 and an Xbox One S. 

The Xbox will p,ah games in 4K with HDR. Don't think the PS4 will unless I upgrade to the Pro model (which I may do if I get a 4K tv). 

 

I play all all sorts of different games. I subscribe to Game Fly (2 game out at a time) so I'm always trying new games. I actually just seen that Game Stop has a new rental program too. $60 for 6 months ($10 a month). 1 game out at a time, but you get to pick 1 game to keep at the end of the 6 months. 

 

 

Ive enjoyed chatting with you on all of this tv stuff. I don't get to talk to too many people who enjoy researching all of this stuff like I do. 

[mrags]

18 minutes ago, BillsFan4 said:

Here man - I just found this article. You were right. The A8F is indeed more expensive than the A1E. Instead of removing the subwoofer, Sony put 2 smaller subwoofers in it. Maybe that's why? 

 

The 55" is $2999 and the 65" is $3999. $12,999 for the 70"! Wow! 

The A1E will actually be the cheaper model, at $2799 for the 55" and $3499 for a 65". 

 

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1518172637

 

sounds like that qled is your best bet for the price. Then just revisit the oled's later down the line when the technology has improved.

 

Or just wait for Samsung's Micro LED technology that will be coming out. Maybe it'll be an improvement over OLED? 

 

 

 

 

Also, on the x900e from last year (I know you are not getting a Sony LED, but I think I am, so I was just looking for your help/opinion again) - 

 

https://www.sony.com/electronics/televisions/xbr-x900e-series/specifications

 

Here are the specs on the 2017 model x900e. It definitely had the directLED (full array) backlight. But all the models lower than this one had the edge lit LED (not the local dimming slim backlight edge LED the 930 had though). 

 

Its just throwing me off that they used that slim backlight on the 930, and used the full array on the lower 900 model, yet called the slim edgelight on the 930 an upgrade over the full array on the 900. I am probably just overthinking it. 

 

Did you you say that stereo advantage has the 930 on display? They usually know their stuff pretty well there. I am going to try and rid there this week I think. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As far as what gaming system I have, I actually have a PS4 and an Xbox One S. 

The Xbox will p,ah games in 4K with HDR. Don't think the PS4 will unless I upgrade to the Pro model (which I may do if I get a 4K tv). 

 

I play all all sorts of different games. I subscribe to Game Fly (2 game out at a time) so I'm always trying new games. I actually just seen that Game Stop has a new rental program too. $60 for 6 months ($10 a month). 1 game out at a time, but you get to pick 1 game to keep at the end of the 6 months. 

 

 

Ive enjoyed chatting with you on all of this tv stuff. I don't get to talk to too many people who enjoy researching all of this stuff like I do. 

Lol. Don’t get confused. I hate having to do all this research. I wish it was just clear that one option is better than the other but that’s not always the case. 

 

Yeah, Stereo Advantage has all of them on the floor to see. So does Best Buy (heading there now actually to just get another look at everything). 

 

You said the 930 was backlit in that last bit. Then said the 900f was full array. Did you mean edgelit? To my knowledge, they are the same but different names. The edgelit is what you don’t want. The color and brightness will not be as good. But I’ll look at them when I head to Best Buy in a little bit. The difference was the “local dimming” to my knowledge that was different in the 930 and 940 vs the 900. Now the new models will all have the same tech. The o my difference in the models above 900 will be difference is size. But I’ll see why they say at B.B.  

 

yeah, the new Samsung tech is probably going to be the best out there when it becomes reality. Right now it’s only a thought and the technology doesn’t actually exist. 

 

For the size and money I really can’t beat the tv. The only issue is I won’t have any extended warranty or anything on it. So the manufacturer will by my only lifeline. Scares me a little bit but not nearly as much as the burn in issues.