Not Sure if This is the Correct Place in the Forum, But...How Would YOU Go About This

[DangeRuss]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

https://www.cnet.com/news/sonys-2017...han-lgs-oleds/

http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-tv/

Three TV manufacturers make OLED TVs: LG, Sony and Panasonic.

Sorry for the off topic Intelli.

* Check Rotel for separate power amps.

As stated in my post #114

[Show spoiler]( http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=114)

The Panasonic and Sony models are built around panels manufactured by LG ..................... So there's only one OLED panel producer

Originally Posted by Waboman

Yes. Yes you do.

Says the man stalking me around these pages .........................

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by DangeRuss

I still have issue with the fact that the inferior product (LCD) is still being sold instead of Plasma

You and me both !!! It still makes me sick to think that Plasma's have been done away with

[DangeRuss]

Originally Posted by Dwayne

You and me both !!! It still makes me sick to think that Plasma's have been done away with

Those darn blasted oversized computer monitors

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by Dwayne

With my ears, and my set up, I can hear the difference like night/day. It's hard for me to believe that everyone else is not like that as well. Having said that, I understand that every ear is different, and I respect that. What one person hears, sounds different to another.

It is most certainly not night and day for me; but, as you stated, every ear is different.

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by gotmule

I think it is a sign of the times. The majority of people out there who will never get to experience even a moderately priced system setup correctly. There are also those who think they have joined the big leagues when they bought their sound bar from Costco. Because of that, it is possible that their ears are not trained to pick up on the differences, either subtle or obvious. They just don't know how to and what to focus on.

I had a coworker think he was a big music guy when he showed me all of his Pandora stations programmed on his phone. I asked him how he listens to his music, and he replied he puts his phone in an empty cup in his car.

I also noticed a lot of posters on this forum on the Oppo thread who just bought the 203 who listen to tv speakers.

Crazy.

I suppose it must be my low-buck, entry-level shithouse-grade gear, then.

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by Dwayne

Had no idea that Sony tried this.

Yeah; I believe it was Sony that came up with the OLED technology -- it was introduced a few years back at either one of the CES shows or another trade show...can't remember exactly which one.

But the prototype was like an 11-inch screen or something like that, selling for an astronomical price. It was ridiculous.

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by DangeRuss

I really If that's truly the case .......................... Then as far as your original question is concerned ........ It would be a total waste to invest your money in external amplification ...... The differences in dynamics you might realize are even smaller

Not true at all. What about the myriad of DVDs we still watch with lossy soundtracks that I feel are "just as enjoyable" as Blu-rays with lossless mixes?

I truly do not believe it would be a total waste to invest in external amplification solely because I happen to disagree that lossless soundtracks sound tremendously, over-the-top better than lossy variants.

Fair enough .............. But for those of us who do, we are definitely glad the lossless codecs exist

That's fine; and I'm not unhappy that they do exist -- I just don't seem to hear a major, Earth-shattering difference between lossy and lossless.

I wonder if he appreciates the difference between MP3 and higher forms of recording ?

That's being somewhat quasi-facetious; I am confident that he does hear a difference between an MP3 file and, say, the SACD 5.1 surround release of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue...

LG is the only manufacturer at present making any kind of OLED screens at all. The Panasonic & Sony models that are trying to break into the market both use panels made by them and only differ in the internal electronics



Most definitely .................. OLED smokes LCD, LED backlit or not

As I said to Dwayne, it was Sony that introduced an OLED prototype to the market a few years back -- but it was ridiculously expensive and small. Don't know why they didn't continue making them for the consumer market at lower prices and in bigger sizes, but perhaps that was the paradox of the times -- there was no way they were going to be able to sell an OLED panel in a large size at an affordable rate. Things are different now, of course, with LG being the only OLED game in town, offering their displays at somewhat reasonable prices.

I appreciate your feedback regarding OLED versus LCD, though; seems you're quite passionate about the picture quality in that regard, so I will place more value on an LG set for my 4K display purchase in the future.

I wonder why it is that the other brands aren't offering OLED sets.

They were the first to manufacture an OLED screen, but it was of a differing technology that was more difficult to produce in large sizes.

And like with any new technology the price was well out of reach

Well, there's the confirmation of my Sony statement (about how they were they first to come out with OLED); indeed, the price of that first tiny prototype was beyond ridiculous, but the same thing could be said about their SXRD projectors -- when the technology came out, the first projector was like 30K U.S. dollars or something (it since, of course, trickled down into much more affordable rear-projection TVs, one of which I own, and projectors).

[DangeRuss]

Originally Posted by IntelliVolume

Not true at all. What about the myriad of DVDs we still watch with lossy soundtracks that I feel are "just as enjoyable" as Blu-rays with lossless mixes?

I too own a lot of DVD's (as seen to the left under my name) and yes they are still quite enjoyable. But as the upconverted 480i DVD doesn't hold a candle to the 1080p Blu-ray video experience, neither does the lossy soundtrack to the lossless one. It's all about varying degrees of quality.

I truly do not believe it would be a total waste to invest in external amplification solely because I happen to disagree that lossless soundtracks sound tremendously, over-the-top better than lossy variants.

I believe you're missing my point ........... Which is .....If you don't hear a discernible difference between lossy and lossless soundtracks, adding more power to your speakers (when you can already get them louder than you want) will give you no major difference in how they'll sound.

IE. If your system presently will play at 85-90 dB (which is quite loud) comfortably, adding twice the power (remember only a 3dB increase) and playing your system at the same 85-90 dB I doubt you would hear a difference

That's fine; and I'm not unhappy that they do exist -- I just don't seem to hear a major, Earth-shattering difference between lossy and lossless.

I don't know that I'd call it earth-shattering ............... But it is a much more realistic & dynamic sound

That's being somewhat quasi-facetious; I am confident that he does hear a difference between an MP3 file and, say, the SACD 5.1 surround release of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue...

Once again ................... I'm being mis-understood. I'm not talking about the difference between stereo and surround sounds, I'm talking about compressed audio signals (MP3) vs. uncompressed or lossless files (FLAC, ACC, etc.)

As I saying to Dwayne, it was Sony that introduced an OLED prototype to the market a few years back -- but it was ridiculously expensive and small. Don't know why they didn't continue making them for the consumer market at lower prices and in bigger sizes, but perhaps that was the paradox of the times -- there was no way they were going to be able to sell an OLED panel in a large size at an affordable rate. Things are different now, of course, with LG being the only OLED game in town, offering their displays at somewhat reasonable prices.

The OLED story is an interesting one as well. There are two differing types of OLED displays ........ The type Sony, Panasonic & Samsung tried to develop and the one presently used by LG. Although the type Sony and the others tried to bring to market is better (scientifically) it is much more difficult to produce and especially in the sizes demanded by the public.

I appreciate your feedback regarding OLED versus LCD, though; seems you're quite passionate about the picture quality in that regard, so I will place more value on an LG set for my 4K display purchase in the future.

I wonder why it is that the other brands aren't offering OLED sets.

Here's a quick rundown .......................................

http://www.digitaltrends.com/feature...vs-arent-dead/

Well, there's the confirmation of my Sony statement (about how they were they first to come out with OLED); indeed, the price of that first tiny prototype was beyond ridiculous, but the same thing could be said about their SXRD projectors -- when the technology came out, the first projector was like 30K U.S. dollars or something (it since, of course, trickled down into much more affordable rear-projection TVs, one of which I own, and projectors).

Well all I can do right now is hope for the best

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by IntelliVolume

I suppose it must be my low-buck, entry-level shithouse-grade gear, then.

Your gear is in no way entry level/crap house stuff . We all want better equipment, however this hobby is very expensive and you will go broke quickly trying to keep up with the new technology that comes out each year. People like myself can only purchase one, maybe two pieces each year, depending on what the wallet say's, but I am happy that I can even participate in this hobby at all, so do not be too hard on yourself/or your gear

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by DangeRuss

I too own a lot of DVD's (as seen to the left under my name) and yes they are still quite enjoyable. But as the upconverted 480i DVD doesn't hold a candle to the 1080p Blu-ray video experience, neither does the lossy soundtrack to the lossless one. It's all about varying degrees of quality.

This is opinion -- it may be opinion that's shared by millions upon millions of home theater hobbyist fanatics (I do understand I'm in the minority on this one), but it's opinion nonetheless; I do know other people who don't agree that DVD "can't hold a candle" to Blu-ray. With a really good BD player and a premium scaling solution (such as the one I use, an Oppo BDP-83 with the Anchor Bay chipset), well-mastered DVDs (i.e. most of those in the Superbit family, a handful of new releases we rent, many others in my personal collection) look surprisingly (and I mean it) high definition-like on my display. I also, of course, disagree regarding the lossy vs. lossless comparison; but that's what it's all about -- having personal opinions and being able to disagree respectfully.

I believe you're missing my point ........... Which is .....If you don't hear a discernible difference between lossy and lossless soundtracks, adding more power to your speakers (when you can already get them louder than you want) will give you no major difference in how they'll sound.

But I think you're missing my point about what I'm after -- it's not that I'd be interested in adding power to dynamically change the experience of the lossless soundtracks, it would be to merely provide raw, unbridled current mainly to push my two front mains harder during loud, rambunctious transients on action film soundtracks.

IE. If your system presently will play at 85-90 dB (which is quite loud) comfortably, adding twice the power (remember only a 3dB increase) and playing your system at the same 85-90 dB I doubt you would hear a difference

This is getting closer to what I wanted to know from the get-go with this thread -- indeed, I have been trying to discern what kind of power I'd have to be looking at in order to experience a difference from the output my current AVR provides now.

You know, it's funny...I always read on forums such as this one how "no one needs more power than what you're average big-brand, well-made receiver puts out on average..." whenever someone asks a question about upgrading to a power amp. But then I have to wonder...aside from needing to drive a giant room loaded with full-range speakers at full-range, why do folks opt for outboard power amps then? If most of the time the suggestions come down to "you're AVR is fine..." why are there so many people running setups that include big, brawny muscle amps and separate processors?

At the end of the day, and coming back to what my original query centered on, if I wanted to make a "sonic dent" by going for a more powerful presentation than my current Onkyo AVR can deliver now, what kind of amplifier power would I be looking at? Let's say -- for a moment and while suspending disbelief a little -- my receiver does put out its "rated" 90 watts per channel...what kind of upgrade would I need to be looking at to hear some real world differences? An amp that puts out 200 watts per channel, 300 per channel? More?

I don't know that I'd call it earth-shattering ............... But it is a much more realistic & dynamic sound

Fair enough; for the most part, I don't find the variances between the codecs all that different. Here's a good example: When Disney first put out the Pirates of the Caribbean films on Blu-ray, they equipped them with lossy Dolby Digital and uncompressed PCM tracks (both in 5.1 arrangements). I own both the first film and the sequel, Dead Man's Chest, on Blu-ray (as well as the first film on DVD with a competent DTS track), so I have some experience with these matters; at any rate, when I flipped back and forth between the PCM track on the sequel (Dead Man's Chest) and the lossy Dolby version, I actually preferred the (bitstreamed) Dolby mix. It seemed stronger, heavier and bolted down with more authority, especially in the LFE, than the PCM track.

Still, that's not to say there aren't some really great lossless mixes out there since the format's launch -- 30 Days of Night (TrueHD), Resident Evil: Extinction (TrueHD), The Incredible Hulk (DTS-HD MA), The Dark Knight Rises (DTS-HD MA), The Dark Knight (TrueHD), Casino Royale: Collector's Edition (TrueHD), Skyfall (DTS-HD MA), Iron Man (TrueHD), Iron Man 2 (DTS-HD MA), Batman v Superman (Atmos/TrueHD), Terminator: Genysis (Atmos/TrueHD), San Andreas (Atmos/TrueHD)...

I'm just personally not hearing the monumental difference between these lossless tracks and some lossy counterparts as the majority of enthusiasts do.

Once again ................... I'm being mis-understood. I'm not talking about the difference between stereo and surround sounds, I'm talking about compressed audio signals (MP3) vs. uncompressed or lossless files (FLAC, ACC, etc.)

That's not how I interpreted it originally; in any case, if I did misunderstand, I still don't believe in my heart of hearts that he wouldn't be able to discern a difference between these.

The OLED story is an interesting one as well. There are two differing types of OLED displays ........ The type Sony, Panasonic & Samsung tried to develop and the one presently used by LG. Although the type Sony and the others tried to bring to market is better (scientifically) it is much more difficult to produce and especially in the sizes demanded by the public.



Here's a quick rundown .......................................

http://www.digitaltrends.com/feature...vs-arent-dead/



Well all I can do right now is hope for the best

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by Dwayne

Your gear is in no way entry level/crap house stuff . We all want better equipment, however this hobby is very expensive and you will go broke quickly trying to keep up with the new technology that comes out each year. People like myself can only purchase one, maybe two pieces each year, depending on what the wallet say's, but I am happy that I can even participate in this hobby at all, so do not be too hard on yourself/or your gear

Seemed like that's what he was trying to say with regard to why I can't discern much difference between the formats, so I didn't know what else to chalk it up to.

[DangeRuss]

Originally Posted by IntelliVolume

This is opinion -- it may be opinion that's shared by millions upon millions of home theater hobbyist fanatics (I do understand I'm in the minority on this one), but it's opinion nonetheless; I do know other people who don't agree that DVD "can't hold a candle" to Blu-ray. With a really good BD player and a premium scaling solution (such as the one I use, an Oppo BDP-83 with the Anchor Bay chipset), well-mastered DVDs (i.e. most of those in the Superbit family, a handful of new releases we rent, many others in my personal collection) look surprisingly (and I mean it) high definition-like on my display. I also, of course, disagree regarding the lossy vs. lossless comparison; but that's what it's all about -- having personal opinions and being able to disagree respectfully.

It's really funny that you're mentioning this when it comes to DVD's ............. Because if you'll notice on my personal thread (in the home theater gallery threads) http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=119038 It took me a while to make the switch to blu-ray primarily for two reasons .......

1) The Blu-ray/ HD-DVD wars were still going on strong and I wanted to wait for a victor plus .....

2) I had already owned the Oppo DV-983H universal DVD player (which the BDP-83 was based on) in my system.

Back in 2008 I still remember when I upgraded to the Oppo for my brand new plasma panel how much better my DVD's looked (due to the reasons you mentioned above) and sounded (due to the upgraded DAC's and OP amp) on that screen and system. It was to the point that all of my friends who've come to my house during that period swore I had a HD player . I was so happy with that player, it allowed me the opportunity to wait for Oppo to develop a blu-ray deck (the BDP-83). Matter of fact, the 83 would still be in my main system if it weren't for the two major upgrades the 103 affords me. And in some ways I still prefer it (the 83)

So I do ................. really understand your views on DVD's and their place in the world ..... I still buy them from time to time due to the much larger library compared to Blu-ray and some titles are just not available in HD.

Heck ................... I believe DVD's still outpace Blu's when it comes to total sales.

But I think you're missing my point about what I'm after -- it's not that I'd be interested in adding power to dynamically change the experience of the lossless soundtracks, it would be to merely provide raw, unbridled current mainly to push my two front mains harder during loud, rambunctious transients on action film soundtracks.

What I was talking about has nothing to do with lossless soundtracks, but the overall perceived benefit / if at all you would realize listening to anything/everything

This is getting closer to what I wanted to know from the get-go with this thread -- indeed, I have been trying to discern what kind of power I'd have to be looking at in order to experience a difference from the output my current AVR provides now.

You know, it's funny...I always read on forums such as this one how "no one needs more power than what you're average big-brand, well-made receiver puts out on average..." whenever someone asks a question about upgrading to a power amp. But then I have to wonder...aside from needing to drive a giant room loaded with full-range speakers at full-range, why do folks opt for outboard power amps then? If most of the time the suggestions come down to "you're AVR is fine..." why are there so many people running setups that include big, brawny muscle amps and separate processors?

I would say .................... There are too many reasons to list here but .........................

Most of the people who go that route (and in the greater scheme of things aren't too many) do because they listen differently. Some because they have larger rooms to fill and their AVR's aren't up to the task. And others purely because they can

At the end of the day, and coming back to what my original query centered on, if I wanted to make a "sonic dent" by going for a more powerful presentation than my current Onkyo AVR can deliver now, what kind of amplifier power would I be looking at? Let's say -- for a moment and while suspending disbelief a little -- my receiver does put out its "rated" 90 watts per channel...what kind of upgrade would I need to be looking at to hear some real world differences? An amp that puts out 200 watts per channel, 300 per channel? More?

Well ............................. Because of our differences of opinion when it comes to lossless vs. lossy, I don't know what the term "real world difference" means or whether or not you'd ever be able to achieve it

Remember .................. For your bass frequencies your sub/subs are doing the heavy lifting ......

But once again ...................... What are you trying to obtain if your system is playing more than loud enough as it is ?

Fair enough; for the most part, I don't find the variances between the codecs all that different. Here's a good example: When Disney first put out the Pirates of the Caribbean films on Blu-ray, they equipped them with lossy Dolby Digital and uncompressed PCM tracks (both in 5.1 arrangements). I own both the first film and the sequel, Dead Man's Chest, on Blu-ray (as well as the first film on DVD with a competent DTS track), so I have some experience with these matters; at any rate, when I flipped back and forth between the PCM track on the sequel (Dead Man's Chest) and the lossy Dolby version, I actually preferred the (bitstreamed) Dolby mix. It seemed stronger, heavier and bolted down with more authority, especially in the LFE, than the PCM track.

Still, that's not to say there aren't some really great lossless mixes out there since the format's launch -- 30 Days of Night (TrueHD), Resident Evil: Extinction (TrueHD), The Incredible Hulk (DTS-HD MA), The Dark Knight Rises (DTS-HD MA), The Dark Knight (TrueHD), Casino Royale: Collector's Edition (TrueHD), Skyfall (DTS-HD MA), Iron Man (TrueHD), Iron Man 2 (DTS-HD MA), Batman v Superman (Atmos/TrueHD), Terminator: Genysis (Atmos/TrueHD), San Andreas (Atmos/TrueHD)...

I'm just personally not hearing the monumental difference between these lossless tracks and some lossy counterparts as the majority of enthusiasts do.

Here's a quick question for ya ...........................

Which device is doing the decoding ........ Your AVR or the BDP ?

It can make a difference.

That's not how I interpreted it originally; in any case, if I did misunderstand, I still don't believe in my heart of hearts that he wouldn't be able to discern a difference between these.

But then again

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by IntelliVolume

Seemed like that's what he was trying to say with regard to why I can't discern much difference between the formats, so I didn't know what else to chalk it up to.

My apologies, as that was certainly not my intention. I simply did not go back in the thread to see your original post. My comment was an opinion on the state of audio today. I am one of the last people on this forum to stir something up. There is nothing wrong with your gear.

[DangeRuss]

Originally Posted by gotmule

My apologies, as that was certainly not my intention. I simply did not go back in the thread to see your original post. My comment was an opinion on the state of audio today. I am one of the last people on this forum to stir something up. There is nothing wrong with your gear.

I was just checking out your signature ................ You have quite an impressive assortment of gear . Have you ever considered starting your own gallery and posting photos of your rig ?

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by DangeRuss

I was just checking out your signature ................ You have quite an impressive assortment of gear . Have you ever considered starting your own gallery and posting photos of your rig ?

Thank you kindly. I have thought about it a couple of times, but never got around to it for some reason. Maybe a project for my next day off.

[DangeRuss]

I guess this thread has lost it's steam

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by DangeRuss

I guess this thread has lost it's steam

Funny , as I was thinking the same thing myself a few days ago. When our good friend Intellivolume started this thread months ago about buying an external amp, I jumped in, then good buddy callas jumped on board, then everyones buddy DangeRuss ( take a bow ) got involved along with many others and this thing just kept on going. A butt load of great advice came out of this thread . C'mon guys/girls, we need a great question that will spark a big discussion, lets keep this thing going .

[IntelliVolume]

Hi fellas, I'm here - just trying to figure out what to do 😊

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by IntelliVolume

Hi fellas, I'm here - just trying to figure out what to do 😊

It's been a while, great to hear from you, hope all is well . Really not sure what to do myself, regarding this thread becoming stale. I thought of starting a post, but all of my questions have been resolved, for the time being anyway. Oh well, looks as if all we can do is wait and see what happens .

[IntelliVolume]

Originally Posted by Dwayne

It's been a while, great to hear from you, hope all is well . Really not sure what to do myself, regarding this thread becoming stale. I thought of starting a post, but all of my questions have been resolved, for the time being anyway. Oh well, looks as if all we can do is wait and see what happens .

Thanks, my friend; good to hear from you too -- and I hope all is well on your end, also.

I have actually been toying with the idea of maybe getting a pro amp, like a Crown or QSC, and driving the RTi12 mains with it...or perhaps two pro mono amps and driving each of the Polks with them; don't know what I am going to do yet.

I'll respond to Russ' last replies to me as soon as I can...