• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • TV and Home Entertainment Technology
TV purchase advice
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
paulmapp8306
15-03-2012
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“You've fallen foul of the advertising con - there are no 600Hz sets, the 600Hz refers to something completely different, and the sets are actually 100Hz refresh rate.”

Not really - I know that 600hz TV (advertised) arnt - just making a point.
Deacon1972
15-03-2012
Originally Posted by paulmapp8306:
“Not really - I know that 600hz TV (advertised) arnt - just making a point.”

Very true, you can blame the LCD manufacturers for this, trying to make out their 240hz/480hz displays are far more superiour than plasma in regards their pixel response times and screen refresh rates. Plasma have only used clever terminology (sub field drive) and advertising to say no they ain't.

Personally I wouldn't say it was a con, a little misleading for those not in the know, some will just go for the highest figure, sometimes this doesn't mean it's the best, but in this case and IMO they would, as they would be getting better response times and better motion on screen with plasma.
Nigel Goodwin
15-03-2012
Originally Posted by Deacon1972:
“Personally I wouldn't say it was a con, a little misleading for those not in the know.”

A 'little' misleading? - how do you work that out?.

It's deliberately and completely misleading, all the public think it refers to refresh rate which is why it's a con.

I don't know where you've got 240/480 from?, I've never seen any UK adverts claiming American 60Hz refresh rates (even though the sets will do them) - and are there any 400Hz sets?.

I'm not convinced of the advantage of 200Hz, so see even less reason to go 400Hz
Deacon1972
15-03-2012
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“A 'little' misleading? - how do you work that out?.

It's deliberately and completely misleading, all the public think it refers to refresh rate which is why it's a con.”

600hz refers to the sub field drive refresh rates. Pixels are excited for them to stay lit by way of pulses. Video @ 60hz will have 10 pulses per frame, effectively the screen is being refreshed 60hz x 10 pulses/frames giving you the value of 600hz. Granted the frame is not being refreshed 600 times a second, but the refresh rate is coming under some processing. I suppose it's the way you look at it to whether you regard it as a con or just a little misleading.

Does it make a difference, I don't know as I've never compared any 600hz displays with any others. What I do know is plasma has nigh on instantaneous response times regardless of any other processing. LCD is a different matter as they have poorer response times, they have addressed this by a similar method called motion interpolation, from what I have heard it does help with blurring, do you regard this as a con also?
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“I don't know where you've got 240/480 from?, I've never seen any UK adverts claiming American 60Hz refresh rates (even though the sets will do them) - and are there any 400Hz sets?.

I'm not convinced of the advantage of 200Hz, so see even less reason to go 400Hz ”

These figures probably refer to American displays as it was a US site where I was doing some reading.
simonn
23-03-2012
Having deliberated for hours, and rethought the size issues, we've now gone for a Samsung 40D8000, being delivered today. Very exciting!

One question still baffles me. Having taken the plunge into Bluray too, the only bit of non HD kit now is Sky, we just have Sky+. We don't watch films on Sky or much sport. So I'm wondering whether I need to go the whole hog and get Sky HD, particularly when the telly I'm getting has a freeview HD and Freesat tuner built in? I'm presuming that the majority of channels I watch are either not HD or are available on one of those two platforms. Therefore I can't see the benefit. I'm presuming that even though it's an HD box, it'll still be broadcasting SD channels at the same definition as my Sky+ box, or is that incorrect?

Another less techy question - can someone point me in the direction of 'feet' for my bluray player. My shelving unit is only designed for 2 bits of kit - my sky+ box and dvd/surround system, and I now need to put a Blu Ray player in their too. Plenty of room, just not enough shelves, so I need to put it on top of the DVD player, but obviously want some space for the units to breathe. Don't just want to prop a video under it as we've done in the past!
Nigel Goodwin
23-03-2012
Originally Posted by Deacon1972:
“600hz refers to the sub field drive refresh rates. Pixels are excited for them to stay lit by way of pulses. Video @ 60hz will have 10 pulses per frame, effectively the screen is being refreshed 60hz x 10 pulses/frames giving you the value of 600hz. Granted the frame is not being refreshed 600 times a second, but the refresh rate is coming under some processing. I suppose it's the way you look at it to whether you regard it as a con or just a little misleading.
”

As it's deliberately intended to deceive people in to thinking it's the refresh rate then obviously it's a con - 100Hz seems the limit on Plasma screens.

Quote:
“
Does it make a difference, I don't know as I've never compared any 600hz displays with any others. What I do know is plasma has nigh on instantaneous response times regardless of any other processing. LCD is a different matter as they have poorer response times, they have addressed this by a similar method called motion interpolation, from what I have heard it does help with blurring, do you regard this as a con also?
”

I'm dubious about the effectiveness of it, but it increases frame rate which is exactly what it claims to do.

I've no idea what you mean by "they have addressed this by a similar method called motion interpolation" - this isn't in any way related to the Plasma sub field drive.

Quote:
“
These figures probably refer to American displays as it was a US site where I was doing some reading.”

It would be, although most (if not all) UK sets will do American rates anyway.
niall campbell
23-03-2012
Originally Posted by simonn:
“Having deliberated for hours, and rethought the size issues, we've now gone for a Samsung 40D8000, being delivered today. Very exciting!

One question still baffles me. Having taken the plunge into Bluray too, the only bit of non HD kit now is Sky, we just have Sky+. We don't watch films on Sky or much sport. So I'm wondering whether I need to go the whole hog and get Sky HD, particularly when the telly I'm getting has a freeview HD and Freesat tuner built in? I'm presuming that the majority of channels I watch are either not HD or are available on one of those two platforms. Therefore I can't see the benefit. I'm presuming that even though it's an HD box, it'll still be broadcasting SD channels at the same definition as my Sky+ box, or is that incorrect?

Another less techy question - can someone point me in the direction of 'feet' for my bluray player. My shelving unit is only designed for 2 bits of kit - my sky+ box and dvd/surround system, and I now need to put a Blu Ray player in their too. Plenty of room, just not enough shelves, so I need to put it on top of the DVD player, but obviously want some space for the units to breathe. Don't just want to prop a video under it as we've done in the past!”

the Sky HD is stunning and is a higher bitrate than most Freeview HD channels

I thought about it as well , but got my HD for £ 4 per month if I keep sports for a year

anyway it re-sorts your HD channels for you and 501 is Sky News HD for instance .

I just wonder if recently they have lowered their bit rates on SD channels like the Sky News ?

dont worry about blu ray too much or get an all in one system ?
Deacon1972
24-03-2012
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“As it's deliberately intended to deceive people in to thinking it's the refresh rate then obviously it's a con - 100Hz seems the limit on Plasma screens.”

How is it a con? Are they advertising their sets as having 600hz refresh rates?

I only have to look on the manufacturers websites (LG/Panasonic) where they state all their TV's have 100Hz (refresh rate) and the 600hz refers to the sub field drive. Where's the con?


Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“I'm dubious about the effectiveness of it, but it increases frame rate which is exactly what it claims to do.”

As I understand it LCD are in the same boat as plasma, none of their sets can give a true 200/400hz refresh rate, they use mathematical techniques to interpolate between frames, basically adding frames similar to plasma's sub field drive.



Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“I've no idea what you mean by "they have addressed this by a similar method called motion interpolation" - this isn't in any way related to the Plasma sub field drive.
”

I was referring to the technique that LCD use to improve motion blur. It does nothing to increase the refresh rate, only frame rate, it gives a better transition between frames. which is what the 600hz sub field drive does on plasma.
Nigel Goodwin
24-03-2012
Originally Posted by Deacon1972:
“How is it a con? Are they advertising their sets as having 600hz refresh rates?
”

They commonly advertise (or at least DID) them as 600Hz TV's - deliberately conning the public in to thinking they are 600Hz refresh rate.

Perhaps they have been censored by the ASA now?, but from the MANY posts on here (who are a 'super-set' of the general public) it's still commonly believed it refers to refresh rate.

Quote:
“
As I understand it LCD are in the same boat as plasma, none of their sets can give a true 200/400hz refresh rate, they use mathematical techniques to interpolate between frames, basically adding frames similar to plasma's sub field drive.
”

I've not heard of any 400Hz sets, but 100Hz and 200Hz sets create extra new frames between the transmitted ones - giving 50 or 100 individual frames per second.

The '600Hz' plasma sets only give 50 individual frames per second as they are only 100Hz.

Quote:
“
I was referring to the technique that LCD use to improve motion blur. It does nothing to increase the refresh rate, only frame rate, it gives a better transition between frames. which is what the 600hz sub field drive does on plasma.”

Does it? - as far as I can make out from the deliberately confusing explanations at Panasonic it doesn't seem to do much at all?, and certainly doesn't produce extra full frames as 200Hz does.
<<
<
2 of 2
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map