480p??? FOUR EIGHTY P???

[pixelthis]

HSN is selling an LED LG model, full array, not edge lit, 55",
for the paltry price of 1499.99.
BUT the big news is...its 480 FPS!!!
They have probably have about 1500 about now.
NEVER heard of a 480FPS, but strange thing, there are
no humans on the video running on the display set.
A BUMBLE BEE, a hummingbird, but no PEOPLE...
HMMMM.....:1:

[Hyfi]

HSN is selling an LED LG model, full array, not edge lit, 55",
for the paltry price of 1499.99.
BUT the big news is...its 480 FPS!!!
They have probably have about 1500 about now.
NEVER heard of a 480FPS, but strange thing, there are
no humans on the video running on the display set.
A BUMBLE BEE, a hummingbird, but no PEOPLE...
HMMMM.....:1:


Sad day when one is reduced to watching HSN.

[bobsticks]

Sad day when one is reduced to watching HSN.

It's where you get the SOTA stuff.

[Mash]

480FPS (frames per second) is 480Hz?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

HSN is selling an LED LG model, full array, not edge lit, 55",
for the paltry price of 1499.99.
BUT the big news is...its 480 FPS!!!
They have probably have about 1500 about now.
NEVER heard of a 480FPS, but strange thing, there are
no humans on the video running on the display set.
A BUMBLE BEE, a hummingbird, but no PEOPLE...
HMMMM.....:1:

You are a stupid old man. There is no such thing as a 480fps set. It is a set with a 480mhz refresh rate idiot.

[Hyfi]

It's where you get the SOTA stuff.

These?

http://www.sotaturntables.com/images/tables_fullres/hires_millennia.jpg

[pixelthis]

You are a stupid old man. There is no such thing as a 480fps set. It is a set with a 480mhz refresh rate idiot.

We went through this before...older man.
If it has 480hz refresh rate, it has 480 frames,
otherwise, what is it refreshing itself with.
WITH a beginning frame rate of 60fps, that is one eight
real material!!!
Small wonder they did not show people during the demo,
they probably look like a cartoon.
AS FOR WATCHING HSN, not only can you find some bargains
(like a full array led 55" 480hz lcd with wifi and web apps FOR 1499) but you learn stuff, like how that weird fan without the blades work.
BEEN KEEPING ME UP ALL NIGHT...:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

We went through this before...older man.
If it has 480hz refresh rate, it has 480 frames,
otherwise, what is it refreshing itself with.
WITH a beginning frame rate of 60fps, that is one eight
real material!!!
Small wonder they did not show people during the demo,
they probably look like a cartoon.
AS FOR WATCHING HSN, not only can you find some bargains
(like a full array led 55" 480hz lcd with wifi and web apps FOR 1499) but you learn stuff, like how that weird fan without the blades work.
BEEN KEEPING ME UP ALL NIGHT...:1:

Well Pix, you didn't know shyte when you came here, you don't know shyte now, and you probably will never learn shyte. At least your consistent...stupid as hell, but consistent.

[kelsci]

http://electronics.hsn.com/lg-55-480hz-full-array-led-smart-hdtv-with-built-in-wi-fi_p-6488512_xp.aspx?webm_id=0&web_id=6488512&sf=ec&dept=ec0073&attr=2837&ocm=EC|ec0073|2837&prev=hp!sf!2837&ccm=EC|ec0073|2837

High your lordship Terrible Terrence. I hope this link works to HSN and the television being spoken in question here.

The way HSN listed the tv was dum-dum as I believe you can see. They should have indicated it was a 1080P set with 480HZ.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

http://electronics.hsn.com/lg-55-480hz-full-array-led-smart-hdtv-with-built-in-wi-fi_p-6488512_xp.aspx?webm_id=0&web_id=6488512&sf=ec&dept=ec0073&attr=2837&ocm=EC|ec0073|2837&prev=hp!sf!2837&ccm=EC|ec0073|2837

High your lordship Terrible Terrence. I hope this link works to HSN and the television being spoken in question here.

The way HSN listed the tv was dum-dum as I believe you can see. They should have indicated it was a 1080P set with 480HZ.

Kel, I am familiar with the set, I am just marveling at the fact that Pix is so stubborn, he ends up just sounding stupid. When presented evidence that he is wrong, he ignores it, and continues with his same rant. Its like he just quit learning at some point in his life.

[Woochifer]

LG makes some great TVs, but you really have to watch out with them, because they will periodically slip some very questionable designs into their lineup (like the 120 Hz HDTVs that didn't allow consumers to disable the motion interpolation). When they introduced their first "240 Hz" HDTVs a couple of years ago, it was nothing more than a 120 Hz design with a backlight strobing at 240 Hz. Not only was this not true 240 Hz, and nothing more than a gimmick to tout on a spec sheet, the strobing backlight had the net effect of cutting the light output in half.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2338779,00.asp

Sony and Samsung did the 240 Hz implementation correctly, by using two separate 120 Hz video processing chips and alternating them. LG, Toshiba, and Vizio did the fake 240 Hz.

With this kind of history and a low price point, I'd be very wary of buying into something that might do nothing more than pump up a spec sheet. This very well might be a good TV (LG's inclusion of ISF calibration settings is something that only Pioneer used to offer), but I wouldn't put any stock whatsoever into this "480 Hz" number.

Judder reduction is fully accomplished using 5:5 frame repeating at 120 Hz, and the motion interpolation feature at higher refresh rates simply means more interpolated images -- and that's not a good thing.

[kelsci]

"Kel, I am familiar with the set, I am just marveling at the fact that Pix is so stubborn, he ends up just sounding stupid. When presented evidence that he is wrong, he ignores it, and continues with his same rant. Its like he just quit learning at some point in his life"

Terrible One, I have a brother who almost does the same thing. Not easy to live with that part of him but everything else is A-OK. He does have a good system, but Kelsci has rules of "alignment" to get the best surround sound which are really quite similar to Dolby's diagrams of a 5.1 channel system. The way he installed his satellites are out of the realm to a great degree of Dolby , but more so, my own system which does outplay his in surround sound because I discovered many years ago how to align the system. As such I will leave it at that.

[pixelthis]

Well Pix, you didn't know shyte when you came here, you don't know shyte now, and you probably will never learn shyte. At least your consistent...stupid as hell, but consistent.

At least I know how to spell S**T.:1:

[pixelthis]

"Kel, I am familiar with the set, I am just marveling at the fact that Pix is so stubborn, he ends up just sounding stupid. When presented evidence that he is wrong, he ignores it, and continues with his same rant. Its like he just quit learning at some point in his life"

Terrible One, I have a brother who almost does the same thing. Not easy to live with that part of him but everything else is A-OK. He does have a good system, but Kelsci has rules of "alignment" to get the best surround sound which are really quite similar to Dolby's diagrams of a 5.1 channel system. The way he installed his satellites are out of the realm to a great degree of Dolby , but more so, my own system which does outplay his in surround sound because I discovered many years ago how to align the system. As such I will leave it at that.

to quote my hero Bugs Bunny...WHAT A MAROON.
My sats are placed the way they are because of a door on
one side and a window on the other.
And "alignment" is a horse and buggy concept when you can
fix a lot of problems with level adjustment and programs like
AUDDESSY.
Not to mention speaker placement is not critical in HT, soundtracks were designed to please the most in a huge theater,
there is a lot of flexibility.
AND my main concern is the fronts, because I am primarily an audio person, but as far as surround goes, my system sounds
great.
And I will leave it at that.:1:

[pixelthis]

LG makes some great TVs, but you really have to watch out with them, because they will periodically slip some very questionable designs into their lineup (like the 120 Hz HDTVs that didn't allow consumers to disable the motion interpolation). When they introduced their first "240 Hz" HDTVs a couple of years ago, it was nothing more than a 120 Hz design with a backlight strobing at 240 Hz. Not only was this not true 240 Hz, and nothing more than a gimmick to tout on a spec sheet, the strobing backlight had the net effect of cutting the light output in half.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2338779,00.asp

Sony and Samsung did the 240 Hz implementation correctly, by using two separate 120 Hz video processing chips and alternating them. LG, Toshiba, and Vizio did the fake 240 Hz.

With this kind of history and a low price point, I'd be very wary of buying into something that might do nothing more than pump up a spec sheet. This very well might be a good TV (LG's inclusion of ISF calibration settings is something that only Pioneer used to offer), but I wouldn't put any stock whatsoever into this "480 Hz" number.

Judder reduction is fully accomplished using 5:5 frame repeating at 120 Hz, and the motion interpolation feature at higher refresh rates simply means more interpolated images -- and that's not a good thing.

I can put the low price point to rest, as this is a one off for HSN'S
birthday, they always have a special "deal".
BUT I have a huge concern about 240 hz, it always looks like video and several others have said so. At 480hz you are spreading
the paint thin.
If you knit the 60 fields together for the standard 30fps, that is
one sixteenth of original material!!!
And if you interpolate each "field" into a full frame that is still
one eight of real material, probably with artifacts.
WE ARE GETTING TO THE POINT that one wag was talking
about years ago, where the only thing a tv gets is a description
of a picture, kinda that way now.:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

LG makes some great TVs, but you really have to watch out with them, because they will periodically slip some very questionable designs into their lineup (like the 120 Hz HDTVs that didn't allow consumers to disable the motion interpolation). When they introduced their first "240 Hz" HDTVs a couple of years ago, it was nothing more than a 120 Hz design with a backlight strobing at 240 Hz. Not only was this not true 240 Hz, and nothing more than a gimmick to tout on a spec sheet, the strobing backlight had the net effect of cutting the light output in half.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2338779,00.asp

This is the very reason why I keep LG televisions in the second tier. They like Vizio always finds a way to do things on the cheap, and then trumpet up the specs so it seems they are ahead of the first tier manufacturers.


Sony and Samsung did the 240 Hz implementation correctly, by using two separate 120 Hz video processing chips and alternating them. LG, Toshiba, and Vizio did the fake 240 Hz.

I do not like the way the 240hz refresh rate looks with films. Because of the extra frame interpolation, grain on films is reduced to a point that it looks like video. While 240hz is great for 3D, it is not so good for film based material.


With this kind of history and a low price point, I'd be very wary of buying into something that might do nothing more than pump up a spec sheet. This very well might be a good TV (LG's inclusion of ISF calibration settings is something that only Pioneer used to offer), but I wouldn't put any stock whatsoever into this "480 Hz" number.

Judder reduction is fully accomplished using 5:5 frame repeating at 120 Hz, and the motion interpolation feature at higher refresh rates simply means more interpolated images -- and that's not a good thing.

I totally agree with you on these two statements. I am also not sold on edge lit set as well. The unevenness it creates on screen is very noticeable on dark backgrounds.

[pixelthis]

Sad day when one is reduced to watching HSN.

And another thing about HSN, I am a geek,
and enjoy watching electronics gear being tested and talked about,
and also watch the videos on utube. I paticulary enjoy the CAMBRIDGE videos where they describe how they make their stuff,
etc.:1:

[pixelthis]

These?

http://www.sotaturntables.com/images/tables_fullres/hires_millennia.jpg

That one was on QVC

[pixelthis]

480FPS (frames per second) is 480Hz?

YEP, got into a huge row with TALKY about it, that the refresh rate is
always the frame rate, that is what "refresh"
means, painting a new frame. SO IF IT "REFRESHES" at
480 fps, that is a "rate" of 480hz. If an alternating current changes
direction 120 times a sec, that is 120hz.
That is the difference between real world knowledge and googling
something. Or maybe hes' using Bing now.:1:

[Hyfi]

That one was on QVC

Ya right! Anyway, in case you didn't get it, it was a play on the acronym for State Of The Art, which that turntable actually is.

And it is an even sadder day when one is reduced to watching QVC.

Don't lie, you were watching for the jewelry and the purses when a stray TV came along and interrupted your fun.:dita:

[kelsci]

Quote from Pixelthis:"to quote my hero Bugs Bunny...WHAT A MAROON.
My sats are placed the way they are because of a door on
one side and a window on the other.
And "alignment" is a horse and buggy concept when you can
fix a lot of problems with level adjustment and programs like
AUDDESSY.
Not to mention speaker placement is not critical in HT, soundtracks were designed to please the most in a huge theater,
there is a lot of flexibility.
AND my main concern is the fronts, because I am primarily an audio person, but as far as surround goes, my system sounds
great.
And I will leave it at that.

Pixel; your calling the wrong person a "maroon". I am glad you system sounds great. I am familiar with the Audessey program since my brother bought a new Denon receiver recently(3311) As good as it is it does not compensate for certain physical measurements and placements of the the whole 5.1 channel set-up. Two channel set-ups are important in relation to your ear level sitting position of the speakers. As far as your set-up goes, you probably did the best you could in hooking up your system because of certain physical barriers. So I do not know if you" jumped the shark" because I never heard your system. I just heard my brothers system one hour ago. If he had set it up properly it would be nearly perfect but it is not. There is certain physical measurement criteria to meet although I can tell you it is not difficult to do. The Dolby labs diagram is IMHO close to what I do but if I recall does not indicate certain "physical measurements" that I know from a hell of a lot of trial and error. My own system is not elaborate at all made up of Minimus 7's for the left-right-surround- an a old garrard M-T-M speaker that I use as a center channel. If you had a center channel would you know if the two woofers are high impedance types wired in parallel or two low impedance types wired in series. I know that the former is why I use the garrard but I have opened up speakers and measured their DC resistance(an item that is most important though others do not think so which is their mistake. The following is a link to my electronics blog. It tells alot of what I have done and what I have owned in the past. So when I write on this site, I do not throw any bull. http://kelsci3.blogspot.com/

[Hyfi]

Quote from Pixelthis:"to quote my hero Bugs Bunny...WHAT A MAROON.
My sats are placed the way they are because of a door on
one side and a window on the other.
And "alignment" is a horse and buggy concept when you can
fix a lot of problems with level adjustment and programs like
AUDDESSY.
Not to mention speaker placement is not critical in HT, soundtracks were designed to please the most in a huge theater,
there is a lot of flexibility.
AND my main concern is the fronts, because I am primarily an audio person, but as far as surround goes, my system sounds
great.
And I will leave it at that.

Pixel; your calling the wrong person a "maroon". I am glad you system sounds great. I am familiar with the Audessey program since my brother bought a new Denon receiver recently(3311) As good as it is it does not compensate for certain physical measurements and placements of the the whole 5.1 channel set-up. Two channel set-ups are important in relation to your ear level sitting position of the speakers. As far as your set-up goes, you probably did the best you could in hooking up your system because of certain physical barriers. So I do not know if you" jumped the shark" because I never heard your system. I just heard my brothers system one hour ago. If he had set it up properly it would be nearly perfect but it is not. There is certain physical measurement criteria to meet although I can tell you it is not difficult to do. The Dolby labs diagram is IMHO close to what I do but if I recall does not indicate certain "physical measurements" that I know from a hell of a lot of trial and error. My own system is not elaborate at all made up of Minimus 7's for the left-right-surround- an a old garrard M-T-M speaker that I use as a center channel. If you had a center channel would you know if the two woofers are high impedance types wired in parallel or two low impedance types wired in series. I know that the former is why I use the garrard but I have opened up speakers and measured their DC resistance(an item that is most important though others do not think so which is their mistake. The following is a link to my electronics blog. It tells alot of what I have done and what I have owned in the past. So when I write on this site, I do not throw any bull. http://kelsci3.blogspot.com/

It's already been pointed out several times that AUDDESSY does not fix all room issues and reflection points. But then again, it always takes time for it to sink in.

[bfalls]

I don't think Auddessy can compensate for PIX's center channel being set too far back. At a minimum, it should be forward enough sound isn't bouncing off the table causing early, or in his case, immediate reflections. It smears the sound and makes the center less detailed. No criticism, just helpful advice.

I won't dis someone because of their system. I understand we all buy what we can afford, or care to spend. I know my systems limitations. I could do more with room treatment and can afford to, but feel the panels are too expensive and can be detrimental to the aesthetics of the room. Since my media room is also my family room, I've made compromises.

I'm also aware of my physical limitations as an older male. My ears aren't what they used to be. It adds to my threshold of diminishing returns. I have Dave Moulton's Golden Ears "Eartraining Course" CD set and understand what to listen for as far as freq resp, distortion, timber, etc... So I know how and what to listen for. But knowing my limitations, there are just some parms I can't/won't comment on, such as high-end (for me above 16KHz, and some low level micro acoustics). This is why PIX is always being called out. He speaks in generalities, except when he want to argrue, then he gets very specific and somewhat creative when the truth doesn't fit his agenda.

If he's happy with his system, more power to him. If he wants to improve it he should listen to advice more and speak less.

[Woochifer]

My sats are placed the way they are because of a door on
one side and a window on the other.
And "alignment" is a horse and buggy concept when you can
fix a lot of problems with level adjustment and programs like
AUDDESSY.

Total BS. Audyssey will only make adjustments for level and delay timing. It won't fix issues that arise out of asymmetrical sound dispersion or early reflections.


Not to mention speaker placement is not critical in HT, soundtracks were designed to please the most in a huge theater,
there is a lot of flexibility.

Not for DVD/Blu-ray soundtracks that were remixed for a 5.1 home theater alignment. Nowadays, that applies to most big budget studio releases. In those cases, the surround speaker positioning is absolutely critical.

Kelsci is totally correct in citing the Dolby alignment recommendations. It's fine to work within room limitations, but don't try to generalize the findings from your room conditions onto others whose rooms do allow for more precise speaker alignment.


AND my main concern is the fronts, because I am primarily an audio person, but as far as surround goes, my system sounds
great.
And I will leave it at that.:1:

So, if your front speakers were also misaligned, are you saying Audyssey would fix that? If alignment is "horse and buggy" stuff for the surround speakers, then why wouldn't it be for the fronts as well? And just because something sounds "great" to you, that doesn't mean that it can't sound better.

[atomicAdam]

Well Pix, you didn't know shyte when you came here, you don't know shyte now, and you probably will never learn shyte. At least your consistent...stupid as hell, but consistent.

Hey STtT -

No personal attacks please. I know Pix is irritating - but we can't just pick on him like this.

If what he says bothers you there is an ignore feature were you won't have to read users post on the ignore. That is better than personal attacks.

[Woochifer]

This is the very reason why I keep LG televisions in the second tier. They like Vizio always finds a way to do things on the cheap, and then trumpet up the specs so it seems they are ahead of the first tier manufacturers.

Yeah, the arms race playing out on the spec sheets has gotten ridiculous. LG does make some very good TVs, but they also release their fair share of turkeys. That's why I'd be cautious in this case, because I do not trust that "480 Hz" spec at all.


I do not like the way the 240hz refresh rate looks with films. Because of the extra frame interpolation, grain on films is reduced to a point that it looks like video. While 240hz is great for 3D, it is not so good for film based material.

I'm not a fan of motion interpolation at all. I see plenty of utility in 120 Hz, because it reduces judder by using 5:5 frame repeating instead of 2:3 pulldown. But, the motion interpolation (i.e., Motionflow, Motion Plus, et al) feature just bastardizes the picture and looks strange with all film-based/24 frame video sources.


I totally agree with you on these two statements. I am also not sold on edge lit set as well. The unevenness it creates on screen is very noticeable on dark backgrounds.

The whole edge lighting thing is another irritating way that manufacturers push inferior designs on an uninformed public. Anything and everything nowadays is touted as "LED TV" when 1) it's nothing more than backlighting; 2) LED edge-lighting is inferior to the sequential local dimming LEDs, yet marketed the same way. LED edge lighting improves the contrast compared to CCFLs, but also narrows the viewing angle. It allows for thinner TVs and might save a little energy, but that's the only real benefit.

[pixelthis]

Yeah, the arms race playing out on the spec sheets has gotten ridiculous. LG does make some very good TVs, but they also release their fair share of turkeys. That's why I'd be cautious in this case, because I do not trust that "480 Hz" spec at all.



I'm not a fan of motion interpolation at all. I see plenty of utility in 120 Hz, because it reduces judder by using 5:5 frame repeating instead of 2:3 pulldown. But, the motion interpolation (i.e., Motionflow, Motion Plus, et al) feature just bastardizes the picture and looks strange with all film-based/24 frame video sources.



The whole edge lighting thing is another irritating way that manufacturers push inferior designs on an uninformed public. Anything and everything nowadays is touted as "LED TV" when 1) it's nothing more than backlighting; 2) LED edge-lighting is inferior to the sequential local dimming LEDs, yet marketed the same way. LED edge lighting improves the contrast compared to CCFLs, but also narrows the viewing angle. It allows for thinner TVs and might save a little energy, but that's the only real benefit.

and where did you get the idea that this set is "edge" lit"?
ITS full array.
YOU CAN DIS LG all you want, and I too am leery of anything
above 120hz, preferring to watch real picture instead of
computer chicanery, but I know from experience that LG does make a mighty fine TV.:1:

[pixelthis]

This is the very reason why I keep LG televisions in the second tier. They like Vizio always finds a way to do things on the cheap, and then trumpet up the specs so it seems they are ahead of the first tier manufacturers.



I do not like the way the 240hz refresh rate looks with films. Because of the extra frame interpolation, grain on films is reduced to a point that it looks like video. While 240hz is great for 3D, it is not so good for film based material.



I totally agree with you on these two statements. I am also not sold on edge lit set as well. The unevenness it creates on screen is very noticeable on dark backgrounds.


I am sure that the engineers at LG are staying up late because of
your "second tier" status, but being second tier yourself I guess you are more comfortable with it.
AND HERE YOU GO RUNNING OFF at the mouth about "edge" lit tv, when I stated that the LG was full array, and now you've gone and confused your buddy WOOCH, which in all honesty
is rather easy to do.:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am sure that the engineers at LG are staying up late because of
your "second tier" status, but being second tier yourself I guess you are more comfortable with it.
AND HERE YOU GO RUNNING OFF at the mouth about "edge" lit tv, when I stated that the LG was full array, and now you've gone and confused your buddy WOOCH, which in all honesty
is rather easy to do.:1:

The king of mediocre and low performance speaks again :rolleyes:

[pixelthis]

The king of mediocre and low performance speaks again :rolleyes:


So what do you have to say? NOT that it matters.:1:

[pixelthis]

FYI, LG has the lowest return rate and the highest customer
satisfaction on the HSN website.:1:

[Woochifer]

and where did you get the idea that this set is "edge" lit"?

And where do you get the idea that I was talking about that particular set in my reply to T?


YOU CAN DIS LG all you want, and I too am leery of anything
above 120hz, preferring to watch real picture instead of
computer chicanery, but I know from experience that LG does make a mighty fine TV.:1:

How am I dissing LG by stating the fact that they sold 120 Hz TVs that didn't allow for disabling the motion interpolation? Or the fact that they built 120 Hz TVs with strobing backlights, and sold them as "240 Hz"?