You need a desk stand? cheap HDMI TV! why you need this channel????

Micro-OLED > OLED > Micro-LED > QLED > LED Micro-OLED and OLED are the best#1. OLED LG and Micro-LED SONY fusion to Micro-OLED. Micro-LED / Mini-LED / Crystal-LED / Nano-LED / NanoCell-LED / NanoMeter-LED Micro-OLED / Mini-OLED / Crystal-OLED / Nano-OLED / NanoCell-OLED / NanoMeter-OLED OLED with no backlight is the best#1 and OLED is patented to it's creator China's LG. And somewhen China's LG will partnership with Japan's SONY micro-LED to create micro-OLED. That micro-OLED would be then 50% Japan's Sony micro and 50% China's LG OLED. Those OLED and Micro-OLED will dominate every tv, monitor, displays, screens arround the whole world. I'm so hyped for OLED and micro-OLED, I am waiting so long for and I hope The Earth & I will survive to its release! But since no one agrees to my offers, the hope's chances looks very bad. LED has to be forbidden, because LED's backlight is unhealthy, backlight towards the face destroys the health of the eyes (very fast!) and even the health of the face-skin (after years). OLED has no backlight, OLED is the best#1. Whoever supports in building LED, who supports in fact last but not least the damage, destroyment and devolution of humans - anger, hate and lost of humanity at the end. LED's backlight is a part of those many bad wrong-going things in real life. To make this clear, ofc I don't mean RGB-LED, I mean the backlight-LED inside of TVs! To make this clear, "Micro-OLED / Mini-OLED / Crystal-OLED / Nano-OLED / NanoCell-OLED / NanoMeter-OLED" has never been said anywhere before me, I am the first who created that word and the fusioned technology it stands for, that means it's patented to me and if China and Sony wants to build that Micro-OLED, they have to ask me for my permission or it will be criminal theft by them. They can have my permission when they pay me 100 million €, that is not much compares to their billions!

10:04 You say that Samsung hdr 10+ is one of the big 2 fighting on either side. Then say it’s in the middle. I’m confused.

Then with all this in mind you should do a budget TV roundup telling folk which brands take a decent stab at colour accuracy within their budget constraints.

Don't lie so much

Well that was long.

To make things even more confusing, HDR means something different in photography than it does in television - generally, in photography, HDR means that you've had a multi-exposure image which has been flattened down into an SDR brightness range, ideally giving the *impression* of a wide dynamic range while still actually being limited to an SDR display.

@@fluffycritter HDR doesn't necessarily mean merging multiple exposures (to a 16bit or 32bit image format). Now we have image editing programs that support 10bit displays. It's also been a fundamental principle with digital photography to have a RAW image format that's higher dynamic range that you tone map to sRGB color space for monitors or print.

@@dsr0116 True, that's why I said "generally" though, since that's the meaning where the term "HDR" first took hold and it's still what's meant by a lot of things, especially lower-end cameras that do cheap HDR by merging multiple rapid exposures or whatever. Like that's what HDR mode on an iPhone used to do, and even higiher-end prosumer cameras still often have an HDR bracketing mode for offline merging elsewhere. Which is to say that the example HDR photo that Quinn showed when explaining what HDR is was probably HDR in that dynamic range compression sense, and not HDR in the "this benefits from a 10-or-more-bit display" sense.

@@fluffycritter There has been a HDR "style" in photography where you take a multiple exposure image and do auto tone mapping (or "compressing" contrast). However, 32bit HDR image formats were also created for 3D animation: where merged exposures can simulate real light values that is used in rendering the environment. Since photography has always dealt with different dynamic ranges of scene, recorded medium, and display/print medium...I've always thought it makes sense to make those delineations. It has always been that a "SDR" image is anything 8bit. Many photographers take a RAW exposure (that can go over 14bits these days) and adjust its contrast for intended display (originally 8bit and now 10bit or 12bit codecs)...that's still a manual form of tone mapping (as you're applying curves). Dolby Vision has its own technology for dynamically tone mapping 12bit space to the display's DR (and there's automatic tone mapping with a smart phone's HDR mode). Same is true for a TV's processor in mapping HDR to its technology/standards.

That's why I don't take KZfaq video titles that seriously anymore, everything is clickbait to attract viewers to the video. The video content seems to differ from the video titles these days anyway

Panasonic OLEDs look amazing as well. What do you think about Samsung QLED -- since most do not have a perfectly dark room to watch TV, wouldn't you think that the brighter QLED is the smarter option? Personally I have a LG OLED for the living room and a projector for my bedroom, the projector is the one I use for dark room movie watching.

Quinn’s title is as bad as the HDR logo on cheap LCD TVs.

I think for HDR content an LCD TV is better. While they don't have infinite contrast, good LCD TVs can have contrast ratios over 30,000 while having 4x more nits.

@@winjaywin Yes, Panasonic OLEDs are fantastic too, but they are unfortunately not available in the US. And no, I don't believe QLED is the smarter option. HDR isn't *just* about shear brightness -- it's about dynamic range (the range of stops from the darkest shadows to the brightest highlights). As far as consumer TVs go, OLEDs do a better job at managing both highlights *and* shadows. :)

Nah this comment took too long

Plasma is better than OLED did it for me. Terrible outdated take. Research more.

Their take on curved displays was also off-putting. Makes me question the rationale of the channel...

@@snazzy Oh, is this how you treat your audience? Time to hit that "don't recommend channel" button...

@Drew that's what i meant. It doesn't come close. People remember plasmas with rose tinted glasses.

Thanks, my dude!

Snazzy Labs will you call her your “SnazzyWife” ? hahaha

@@meshachlovelace.8162 This is a great question. LOL

@@meshachlovelace.8162 even if he did. youtube converts it down to non-HDR

Drew why

500 bucks is a recovering audiophile. 5000 bucks not so much. If I can't tell the difference I don't bother. Sadly I can even with my crappy hearing.

500 Bucks is more than all of my audio related gear combine, some Audiophile really go into the deep water territory. Edit: Let me count the beans..... Sony WH 1000XM3 : 200 bucks Sennheiser HD6XX: 200 bucks Sony WI 1000X: exactly 100 bucks! Hmm, looks like I lied, it is exactly how much my gear worth.

@@Verpal Nice headphones, bro.

Mr. Snazzy was one of the influential people who helped me get into the headphone hobby back in the day.. @@Verpal Man, headphones have gotten so cheap over the years. Do you have any standalone DACs or amps yet?

I use a sennheiser hd100 combined with a traktor audio 2 interface on my phone, it sounds better than a more expensive headphone plugged in a midrange pro mixing panel. Edit: 'counting beans' this amounts to 36 plus 80 euros = 116€. Oh, and I have expert hearing and I'm a sort of audiophile too.

Most of the time "HDR" display can have a peak brightness of ~400 nits, and don’t even have dimming zones, so the blacks are always gray.

No it isn't worse there is a certification unlike with tv manufacturers, check VESA HDR certified.

Yes, but the average consumer won't look for "HDR1000 VESA certification"

@@LePoudingue That's not my point, my point is at least with monitors there is some kind of official certification whereas with tv's there is not. As for the average consumer in this day and age if you aren't willing to do a little research before buying when it's as simple as doing a google search then it's not anyone fault but your own if you are misinformed.

@@charaznable8072 yes I see what you mean. The best way to have nice products is however to read detailed reviews for color gammut coverage, contrast ratio...

True for everything in technology. And over time it becomes cheaper (and a new, expensive technology is introduced)

nobody mentions this, but windows HDR implementation is absolute garbage. playing a 4k HDR video on youtube results in massive frame drops even on powerful hardware

@@Blox117 nobody asked you. You're stealing my comment thunder

@@KAZAM707 my sincerest apologies, i didnt know anyone cared for what you had to say.

@@Blox117 I appreciate the apology. Now you know better. I think we all learned a valuable lesson.

They can if it is an Oled

The same way Apple can use the Pro moniker on ridiculous products like the Airpods 'Pro'.

because HDR 10 has lower brightness certifications. HDR 10 300, 600 and more.

these tvs support HDR format but not displaying it. it is like some chinese brand marketing their tv as 4k capable but without 4k input support.

It displays HDR properly. As in, you can play HDR content without washed out gray-ish colors. Which is pretty nice to be able to do, even if your TV can't display proper HDR.

Well let’s not forgot the color volume but yes besides that you’re right

@@zombiebillcosby well I think the color volume of these sets are pretty good as they are. Especially any TV with QLED tech which tends to have better color volume than even OLED

FURognar I was actually looking at the color volumes of OLEDs and QLEDs (at least the Samsung ones) and the OLEDs have significantly better color gamut than any of the QLEDs and only slightly by like 3% or so worse color volume than the QLED. This includes last years models too

@@FURognar I've looked at both LG's oled and Samsung's Qled just a few days ago and I must say..Qled is a real good competitor.

@@Groovemasterflex1 once you calibrate them, they look pretty close to one another. The excellent contrast of OLED will make them pop a little more, but the advent of HDR helped to close that gap just a little bit more.

Nick Firth I was wondering why he’d say that and realised most of his audience are from US 😂 UK weather sucks

What, you didn't see the shade during that lightning strike? I guess the torrential rain got in your eyes...

Weeps in desert.

@Bobby Brady I think even the phrase "on the bright side" is a cruel irony for the given circumstances 😩

What? It didn’t flatten out?

Put the TV in between two heavy books, it’ll flatten out over night.

@Monkey Bob OLED , My guy

Cursed, it is

@@ggali09 Lmao Dude!

Definitely just you, but I don't blame you. Most HDR content streaming is good, not great. For example, HDR on the Godzilla vs Kong 4k disc is incredible. That same movie on streaming did not have the same impact. If I had not watched them back to back I wouldn't have noticed, but the difference is there. Try and find some reference quality stuff and I think you'll see your CX in a new light. Gears of War 5 is also the best HDR I've seen in a game so far, you might want to try it out if you have an Xbox

it’s not just you, HDR for me on my cx is terrible , specially for gaming. I’ll admit some scenes look gorgeous but for the most part it’s more frustrating than enjoyable. it’s crazy how one scene can look great than the time of day changes and it looks terrible. at this rate you have to adjust settings each time the geme changes from a night scene to a day scene.

Not just you. I've done a tin of testing on my LG C2 and SDR looks so much more vibrant. I've compared the same content in HDR vs SDR dozens of times. HDR almost always looks muted and bland when compared to SDR. I can only assume most people have simply never actually compared and are just assuming HDR is better. Its not, SDR truly looks substantially better than HDR. I really cannot understand how people can like HDR.

I think it's just to certify the peak/minimum brightness of displays though. You'd also need the display to be HDR10/+ or Dolby Vision on top of it. Definitely agree though, in terms of hardware certificate, it does seem good, though thee Asus Vivobook is certified as HDR600, however, there appears to be little evidence that the peak brightness actually reaches that high.

Hey I'm planning on buying the LG CX but is hesitant to because I don't want to be watching a movie and then see dark scenes portrayed too dark where I can't see details in shadows. Like at the 4:46 mark. He's on Netflix showing a tiny trailer but the TV makes it out darker than desired. Does you LG CX portray scenes like that also? Is 4:46 an accurate occurrence? Please I would love to know because I have to make a decision this weekend

Mikelara973 “too dark” is a subjective matter. I have a C9 btw, not a CX. I know that visiting a showroom might be challenging during the pandemic, but seeing it for yourself is still the best way to judge if the dark scenes will be too dark for you. Personally, I don’t have problems with dark scenes on my OLED. What you see on KZfaq is worse than in real life mostly due to the compression destroying the shadow details and also because the camera captures it differently than the human eye.

Mikelara973 I have a C9. I was worried about the brightness, then I realized the c9 was actually twice as bright as my older vizio. I have a very bright living room and this tv reflects less light than my old lcd and gets brighter. The first time you turn it on and it stays black, but the logo comes up, youll wonder why you were ever worried :)

lolololol stop. lg oled are farthest thing from bright

Dennis Finan yeah someone’s “not bright enough” is someone else’s “ouch my eyes hurt”. Also depends on the environment.

he totally forgot about it

Vesa hdr is for monitors, not normally used in tv sets

"This" is HDR haha

Didn't see any LG OLED GX 77 quirks and features.

@@super_sigma_ yea and that the reason LG OLED GX 77 scores the lowest points in my Dougscore

The only tech that's as good as plasma is OLED. If I couldn't afford an OLED TV I would definitely buy a used plasma. All of the LCD tech is junk, even the 2020 models from Samsung and LG. It all still has the same old problems with viewing angles and blacks. The manufacturers killed plasma because LCD is cheaper and much more profitable for them.

@@Neiva71 or just put it on 1440p and it stays on 1440 on all videos?

@@Neiva71 he is not even 12 i guess....

Yeah, I already did that, it cost £300, and said HDR on the box so I guess I got scammed haha...

"Ballsed"

@@madmax2069 yes cause there are 2 not 1 :P

Exactly!

HDR conten you meant? studio's? Re render them at home?

Walner Mercado .WMRK2 guess i better not throw away my kuro after feeling inferior from you tubers and haters talking about the new ones and smack about plasma

I still have my Sony 1080p. I'm nervous to upgrade to 4K. All my mate's UHDs look so dark in comparison.

@@simonfilmfan4899 personally I rather watch movies on my 1080P plasma TV than my new LG 4k OLED.

That's curious, as I see a huge difference on the Galaxy S10 between SDR and HDR content (though I rarely watch HDR on my phone as the impact is not the same on such a small sceeen). Were you in a bright environment? It could have been fighting with the processing used to scale-up the contrast to combat the lighting in the room.

Alex Atkin I enjoy the difference and will seek out HDR when possible. (:

Do you remember the video by chance? To my knowledge they started an open source HDR10+ so to avoid Dolbys Visions added licensing fee and ultimately is an update to HDR10 by allowing scene by scene or frame by frame making the metadata dynamically update on levels as opposed to the current set values we have now. They already meet Vesas HDR certifications and their Oled phone panels and 2022 Q OLED panels will also use the tech. If there's any article or more recent news to this you have then I'd like to have a look to see if anythings changed.

@@CJ_Williams I did look for it after i wrote this comment but i couldn't find it; it must be burred inside one of Linus' LG videos i guess, if my memory serves me right and the fact that he gets inside information directly from LG; the reason was because of a very specific lab test used in the certification; some measure it cannot quite reach it; i'll have another look

@@St0RM33 That is far from true Licensing is the name of the business.. As an example ..do you really think $20,000 monitors which lack DV.. HGiG.. or even HDCP.. are worse than a generic but "certified" 600usd TV? Now we have seen the recent release of QD-Oled essentially the most capable panels ever made.. Do you really think those are missing something?

It's a futile hobby, neverending comparison and $

Those are VESA display specs that're applied to monitors, not TVs...

@@markjacobs1086 that's not the vesa... thats the hdr specs and tvs have them as well if you look at the specs.

@@HarlesBently Those 3 specifically are VESA display HDR specs used for monitors. TVs I haven't really seen with these badges ensuring the claims of the manufacturer are met by a individual 3rd party (actually tested).

@@markjacobs1086 Then you haven't been looking properly.

Seems to me you don’t love your cheap TCL 55 inch 4K because you put a sad face

@@thedarkforce9596 I just was sad that Snazzy was poo pooing on my tv basically lol

It's amazing for the price still! I paid 550CAD for it a year or two ago and I have no regrets, though its biggest flaw is that it's dim in HDR, in a moderately lit room it can still dazzle with the picture it displays, it's still amazing that they're that cheap. They kept the same model around for even cheaper, I think I saw it on Amazon for in the 300s now. Still a great value. And Mini-LED in the 6 series for a few hundred more is also impressive.

@@tipoomaster I feel the same way. As much as I would have loved a vizio 4k TV that excels even more, it was hard to justify a TV that was 2x-4x the price. Maybe one day but the TCL is pretty damn good for the money. I know Snazzy wasnt crapping on the TV as a whole, just the HDR so no hard feelings haha.

It’s not true the old pioneers Kuro as good as they were are no match for modern TVs especially LG OLED

I also have the latest panasonic plasma they have made. Very good picture quality. Let's see what panasonic will be bringing in the upcoming 2 years to eventually upgrade.

Yes

I loved my OLED too, until I got major burn-in after only a few years :( Just replaced with a new Sony LCD, looks just as good.

@@jonnyeh aw the poor baby!

@@juno1597 that will be you too eventually

@@FURognar I've heard that with plasmas. I still own Samsung high tier 50" plasma tv that will turn 11 years soon and still works like charm, zero burn ins. Moved it to my bedroom, and replaced it with OLED this year.

Yes. I got a Sony A8H and I had to reduce the light massively for gaming otherwise my eyes got so tired I wasnt able to look at it for more than 30min. But I think its not the light, its the contrast. Its hrad to see that kind of a contrast at the same time. Might be better with ambient light behind or next to the TV

Yeah I got a 400 nit 4k LG . Even at 80% brightness. It's twice as bright as my old 1080 monitor.

The main problem are reflections.. not brightness.

That's what I assumed as well.

Yea I heard it and I was like "wait what was that?"

@Drew Sure it's a fine tv for the price, but as an HDR display it's just straight up bad. 200 nits peak brightness is simply not enough, HDR will looks worse than SDR.

Drew lol, who exactly would I be shilling for?

@@robbertjansen4199 I mean, it really depends on which model you get. Yeah the 4 series is likely not the best HDR display, but then again it is dirt cheap and looks decent enough for the price. The 6 series has decent HDR for example (and onward). The 6 series is still pretty well priced too.

@Drew no, you're wrong. The TCL can't produce deep blacks and the peak brightness is just lousy... What you would expect for that price. My gf bought one after my old 1080p Sony TV died and when I compare it to my Sony XF90 it's just two different worlds. But for the price we got the TCL, it's of course very good and for the sleeping room it's more than enough. Still it's shitty HDR, we don't need to lie.

@Drew Are you trolling? Or are you just upset you wasted money on a non HDR TV? Either way you simply cannot argue that the 4 series is a serviceable HDR tv. Especially when compared to the x900f. The numbers don't lie. If you're a TCL fan boy then fine, but the 4 series should not be the hill you die on.

I noticed it too.

I wonder about that too, can Quinn clarify what he should've said instead.

I had to re-watch that part a few times lol

@@RatchetRorschach He meant to say "So, we've got Dolby Vision on one side, and HDR10 on the other. The two big format winners, it seems. And in the middle we got Samsung HDR 10+"

I find that HDR on my C2 OLED almost always looks worse than SDR if I test the same content in both formats. HDR looks so bland and muted. SDR is vibrant and pops. This is on a calibrated set mind you. Completely unimpressed with HDR.

Me too! I always prefer to watch the Movie in 3D on my Beamer in FHD instead of 4KHDR, cause you are just so much more into the movie in 3D!

I'll *never* understand why all the companies dropped such a fascinating technology all at once in 2017. All 3d tvs, cameras and pc monitors. Not a single niche product for those who liked it! 3D was suddenly *_BANNED_* for home use. 🚫😫 I suspect a patent war with LG, but who the heck knows...

@@Caesaurus Yeah unfortunately. I'm wondering why exactly ...? 😩😞

@@Talia.777 Mostly because the media tendentious war against it, just search for the cnet's disgusting article "Shambling corpse of 3D TV finally falls down dead". "Finally"! Such a joy and such a relief for them...

Also found that weird.

And they still suck for 16:9 monitors. Large ultra-wide for a single user, curved makes sense.