I still fail to see how any of this is Sony (or any other TV maker) issue, wouldn't the problem lay with AVR manufacturer (if specific functionality was indeed promised and not possible)?
and if it was not promised (and people assumed ) then it is on people - i.e. i have Denon AVR from 2016 that I am still happy with. it does what they say it would do then. they also released firmware updates over the years increasing functionality (with no cost to me). It does not do some ulta fancy brag whatever stuff (16K@480Hrz , etc) and as consumer I know it. If I want new capabilities, I would have to buy new equipment.
They released the firmware update last week.
BTW: HDTVTest is a great channel
I still fail to see how any of this is Sony (or any other TV maker) issue, wouldn't the problem lay with AVR manufacturer (if specific functionality was indeed promised and not possible)?
and if it was not promised (and people assumed ) then it is on people - i.e. i have Denon AVR from 2016 that I am still happy with. it does what they say it would do then. they also released firmware updates over the years increasing functionality (with no cost to me). It does not do some ulta fancy brag whatever stuff (16K@480Hrz , etc) and as consumer I know it. If I want new capabilities, I would have to buy new equipment.
You should read up on it. The chipset can only pass the signal with 4K 120hz and HDR or 8k 60hz and HDR if it is sent a specific way. This incompatibility was not known until we had devices outputting HDMI 2.1.
The work around is to use eARC from the TV. In other words plug everything into the TV and pass the audio to the AVR that way. Problem is TV manufacturers cheaped out and only provide one or two HDMI 2.1 ports on the TV. Some of those ports also happen to be the eARC port which makes them unusable for this. The only manufacturer who provided HDMI 2.1 for all the ports is LG. So I’m saying that while this sucks, I can work around it because my LG CX has 4 HDMI 2.1 ports while someone’s Samsung Q series TV only has 2 and one will be used by eARC and they have no work around.
Thank you sir. Again, respectfully - is Sony the maker of the said chip in question?
if not, then why are folks quick to jump on someone acting as TV manufacturer for a problem elsewhere not caused by them?
Just because some work around for some problem somewhere else does not work for all possible combination that in my book is not tv's fault..
trying to be reasonably here. assign fault there fault is due.
Also, my TV just died so I am in the market to shop for one. I would be getting console(s) when available (xbx and ps5) and it is my Denon from 2016 max out at 4K/60Hz so thank for bringing my attention to this. I may buy up a new receiver as well once I know what does work properly.
P.S. so I read up on it. I can not assign fault to anyone here other than companies not talking to each other (which they are not forced to).
- can existing chip in those receives handle 4k/120hz source. yes (if sent in compressed form).
- can console manufacturers (Microsoft, Sony) send the same source compressed/uncompressed ? probably to very likely. when? who knows, whenever they do it in firmware
a bunch of noise about nothing imho.. normal birthing pains of newer tech. if one wants to avoid dealing with it, one can wait out 6-12 months and get initial fixes come in to both xbox x and ps5...
It sounds like there may be an issue with the new FRL signaling but there aren't any real details on it yet so no way to say for sure. Somewhere, possibly avsforum, I saw that the problem may be that the Panasonic chips are compressing higher bandwidth signals with DSC (display stream compression, a VESA feature that HDMI 2.1 has adopted), which the TVs do not support. They don't have to support it though because it's an optional feature. The sources are providing an uncompressed signal which is why they work when connected directly to the TV. It seems to be related to 8k settings in the receiver, which in some cases will need DSC, and 4k/120 is getting lumped in with it. It must be compressing whenever FRL kicks in over TMDS.
Either way blame lies primarily with Panasonic but the receiver manufacturers and TV manufacturers can probably take a little as well. The Panasonic chip is needlessly compressing some signals. DSC isn't needed for 4k/120 10-bit, so I'm sure there was some small cost savings in not implementing it in the TVs. Additionally, until recently there weren't any readily available consumer TV's that could do more. Looks like there are a few 8k TVs from Samsung now that aren't stupid expensive, but I just found out googling around and don't know anything about them. The receiver manufacturers either didn't test properly or they did but somebody swept the issue under the rug because they didn't understand the entire market. Take Panasonic out of the equation and we still have to ask how much of HDMI 2.1 we're getting when we purchase a device.
on a personal front, I did some searches for 65 inch OLED TV. surprised how little actually reviewed good on things like AV forum (which I trust more than paid review sites). buggy firmware messes, build quality issue, weird design decisions omitting features, urghh. as consumer ready to spend few $k on TV for next 3-5 years, I dont see much to buy..
What sort of issues are you seeing? I'm personally tempted by features such as ALLM and VRR that just don't exist in my 930e. I found an awkward work-around that involved running another cable that was on a TV input that was dedicated to Game Mode, but given that I run all my cables through the wall, that came with its own challenges. Rtings has fairly good reviews for the LG CX series, and the only negative remarks being the typical suspects for OLED TVs such as lower maximum brightness, potential burn-in, etc.
EDIT:
Although, I did see an interesting difference with the CX that might present a problem to some people. A photo of the rear of the TV at Best Buy showed that the VESA mounting holes are closer toward the bottom of the TV. In my experience, LCD TVs typically place the VESA mount around the middle, which means that trying to use the same mount position will likely place your TV too high.
I bought 77cx, it was worse than yours... i replaced it for another one, second 77cx also had patchiness .... i returned it. And bought 65GX... black patches looks like yours.... also i bought 55GX... its flawless, no bands, patches... i suppose only 65”+ panels suffer this problemspacemanvt said:
I have returned by first LG CX 65 panel and I am on my second panel, but posted pics of both below. , its very very similar to the first panel I got, maybe slightly worse. Remarkably similar. The screenshot is from TV show called the OA netflix at 14:30 which does a great job of showing the banding and black blob issue.
TV 1 (returned) about 60-70 hours of use and 7 or so Pixel refreshes run.
View attachment 3029024
View attachment 3029025
Second TV: About 10 hours of use
View attachment 3029026
View attachment 3029027
I plan to run a pixel refresh tonight (after 12 hours of use) to see if it evens things out and it seems as though there a bit of yellow and blue tinting I need to look into. Weird how similar they are. Just to be clear, in most content, i dont see anything, just the ones from the front page and the OA .
I am likely to keep this one though, doesn't seem like its worth the trouble to try for another panel or get an LED instead.. not sure what to do at this point.
Thoughts?
I was poking around AVSForum, and one user reported that while 4K120 + HDR (10-bit) did not work, he was able to get 4K100 10-bit to work. One important thing that the user notes is that while 4K60 also worked, 4K60 did not allow for G-Sync with the 3000-series GeForce card, but 4K100 did work with VRR/G-Sync.
As for the number of ports, I did see an interesting remark from Denon that part of the reason why they only include a single 8K-capable port is because it's apparently prohibitively expensive to use all 8K. I don't really know the validity behind this, but I guess I would say that if they're going to sell higher-end models, then they should consider maybe providing more as you scale up. For example, the lower-end 2000 series could have one, and it goes up to two on the 4000 series.
What sort of issues are you seeing? I'm personally tempted by features such as ALLM and VRR that just don't exist in my 930e. I found an awkward work-around that involved running another cable that was on a TV input that was dedicated to Game Mode, but given that I run all my cables through the wall, that came with its own challenges. Rtings has fairly good reviews for the LG CX series, and the only negative remarks being the typical suspects for OLED TVs such as lower maximum brightness, potential burn-in, etc.
EDIT:
Although, I did see an interesting difference with the CX that might present a problem to some people. A photo of the rear of the TV at Best Buy showed that the VESA mounting holes are closer toward the bottom of the TV. In my experience, LCD TVs typically place the VESA mount around the middle, which means that trying to use the same mount position will likely place your TV too high.
Visio OLED - bunch of issues with firmware
LG CX (currently my likely selection ) - list of features removed, 503 pages long (!) separate thread on banding and uniformity issues in which CX is also mentioned in many posts. This does not inspire confidence .
Post like below give me pause
I bought 77cx, it was worse than yours... i replaced it for another one, second 77cx also had patchiness .... i returned it. And bought 65GX... black patches looks like yours.... also i bought 55GX... its flawless, no bands, patches... i suppose only 65”+ panels suffer this problem
I have a 65" CX and no issues with the panel. One thing about that post you found. You are not supposed to run the pixel refresh manually multiple times like that. You artificially age the pixels and can actually make the TV worse. If it's bad out of the box, return it.
I agree that consumers are often to blame for making assumptions, particularly at the launch of new hardware, but the problem in this case isn't something you could identify looking at published device specifications. The devices all technically meet HDMI specification, but due to the specific implementation of optional features there are some incompatibilities. IMO this comes down to basic HDMI 2.1 functionality not working as it should, and it's primarily due to the chip in the receiver. Those of us who are aware will certainly be watching carefully before we buy something, but the average consumer shouldn't have to do anything more than check that there's at least one HDMI 2.1 port on each of the source, receiver, and TV.And it is not even Panasonic itself - it is a different company doing business as Panasonic solutions or something (Panasonic proper sold that business).
And i do not get 'a little as well' at all - same way , we should assign a lot more blame than 'a little as well' to the actual consumer getting TV. if person buying TV does not read the actual spec (and can not tell how many HDMI ports it has), they only have themselves to blame.
I prefer to think of people as adults and stop with childish 'blame belongs everywhere but not me'.
it is what it is, nothing is broken, everything is technically true. if you want a specific very custom unique scenario of tech that is not even released yet, then you wait.
on a personal front, I did some searches for 65 inch OLED TV. surprised how little actually reviewed good on things like AV forum (which I trust more than paid review sites). buggy firmware messes, build quality issue, weird design decisions omitting features, urghh. as consumer ready to spend few $k on TV for next 3-5 years, I dont see much to buy..
I agree that consumers are often to blame for making assumptions, particularly at the launch of new hardware, but the problem in this case isn't something you could identify looking at published device specifications. The devices all technically meet HDMI specification, but due to the specific implementation of optional features there are some incompatibilities. IMO this comes down to basic HDMI 2.1 functionality not working as it should, and it's primarily due to the chip in the receiver. Those of us who are aware will certainly be watching carefully before we buy something, but the average consumer shouldn't have to do anything more than check that there's at least one HDMI 2.1 port on each of the source, receiver, and TV.
Would you be willing to give a quick/summary review of your thoughts with it? Do you like it? Are there things you wish you knew before you bought?
I am planning to connect this to Denon 3300W receiver (which does not support HDMI 2.1) and feed receiver primarily from nvidia shield TV.
Thank you
At the end to me this is an AV receiver specific item, nothing to do with TVs themselves (which is how the conversation started with people blaming Sony). Your shiny new receiver is not currently compatible with your shiny new console on one very specific scenario - big deal! wait until AV receiver manufacture does something ,console maker does something, Nvidia pushes it in driver update for GPUs for those who game with PC, or all of the above. Move to the next world problem to solve..
Forget the AVR situation.
Think about it this way in regards to TVs. The number of people hooking their consoles and other equipment up through an AVR is small. The number of people hooking up directly to the tv is large. Why have a TV that does all the 120hz, VRR, and gaming stuff if you have 1 HDMI 2.1 port? It’s only usable for one device and there are up to 3 devices this year that can use it.
Again I go back to my original argument. It’s manufacturers being cheap. Heck Sony released a statement about their 120hz mode on their new 900 series tv that just got updated for HDMI 2.1 and say that the blurry image during motion is on purpose. Think about that. How can other manufacturers not have a blurry picture when using 120hz and they can’t do that? Also why did they have to do a firmware update to make HDMI 2.1 usable? That’s just shady.
on the bolded part ->that that is what you as consumer bought and that is what they as manufacturers had to sell (in turn buying from various vendors doing R&D on various components of the system). Each chip has a specific bandwidth and compute requirements, if manufacturer had something that would give you HDMI 2.1 with *whatever feature* and wanted to put it into device then you would have something to buy. until they do, they sell what they sell and you as consumer make decision to buy or wait. same applies to all features - want 16K screens? no problem, just wait half a decade. want one cable with 100GB bandwidth for video, similarly wait. cant wait, want you TV now? then I can not complain as a consumer..
As manufacturers are 'cheap' - they are trying to have a product to sell at the price we (as consumers) would buy. this is how supply/demand (aka 'market') works. hardly a 'fault'. if I do not think it is a good value, I dont buy. if enough of 'I' do that then another maker positions to address the demand (mid range phones, lower version of consoles, whatever).
lastly on the TV
1. I never got why people who are willing to spend thousands of dollars 'for best experience' don't spend a fraction of that on basic sound. real positional/surround sound is making experience so much more immersive than any transition from 60Hz to 120Hz. same thing on PC - people spend many hundreds on good video card and rely on trashy sound that comes with their motherboard.. *shaking head*
2. for those connecting console into TV directly, they currently have many solutions including this very difficult and strenous thing called get off the couch , walk 5 steps and move HDMI cable end by 3 inches (if you really really really care about this thing you never heard off for lotz of hertz and super resolution -then move the cable that goes into your TV from your XBOX to PS5). and if you , as consumer, are not willing to undergo this very difficult physical activity then you don't care enough about it. problem solved either way.
Thank you for the commends earlier on LG CX. I went out to Costco and brought one phone (65 inch model). Kids are happy as they have their youtube/netflix again on big screen.
I am another. The only game I have ever played online was Doom 3. And that was 13 years ago. I don't need anything social / sharing apps. Ive never even used 80% of the things on my PS4.Me too. Like 90% of that shit I don't care about at all. I cannot STAND the Xbox One dashboard there is so much crap on there and it is so unorganized. This looks to be going more that direction than what the PS4 did.
Just two days ago I bought a collectible figure online from a toystore...7 inch figure. Was $36 to ship securely. But hey, I wanted it as soon as possible. I know people ship gouges...I think im just an impatient person.Just got this email from Gamestop about my PS5 preorder.
They wanted like $30 for launch day delivery so screw that.
Any word on the PS5 supporting 1440p like the Xbox? Sorry if this has already been mentioned as I did not want to look through 15 pages.
This looks so much better than the default PS5.
Limited Edition V1 Matte Black
Limited Edition V1 Matte black Playstation 5 custom faceplate. Shipped on or before November 12th This is an unofficial Playstation 5 faceplate. We are not affiliated in any way with Sony, Playstation, or the Playstation 5 brand.www.platestation5.com