Which Sony? (Last question - I promise!)

**gmarceau** · 12-09-2009, 03:35 PM

I'd check home theater mag.

The xbr9 does not have the lowest black level of any display. Who knows how these guys test, but they've got an lnb650 beating out the sammy 8500 in blacks!?!?

The blacks on the V series get deep, they've been tested at .008 ft/L in HTMag (backlight at minimum), along with the XBR9. That's a deeper number than 0.05 cd/m, correct me if I'm wrong. With some ambient light in the room, the black bars are inky black. With the lights off, not quite as much. Put the set in eco mode with the backlight at minimum in a dark room, and you've got CRT blacks, but a dim picture.

Personally, I'd be interested in what someone could get on a black level reading with backlight at minimum and brightness @ 51 (this gives the deepest black I've seen, as the backlight dims until 51 on a full black screen). dsskid, what was the backlight at when you measured blacks?

Advanced contrast enhancer, say what you will about the feature, but it actually increases contrast, at least when I eyeball it. Whites get whiter and blacks get deeper. At the medium setting, if there is a dark enough picture on screen, the screen will dim, but setting it again on high will allow the whites to creep back up again. Auto-dimming is a kind of non-issue now with firmware updates.

I've actually found myself resetting white balance and putting hue at 0. I could never get acceptable saturation with hue set off of 0, although this is supposedly closer to industry standard. Color at 46-47 is nice, but put the hue at R4 or G5 or which ever method is giving more accuracy, it doesn't look right when color saturation increases. It does look excellent at around 40 on color, however, when these calibration numbers are put in.

I also can't tell the difference between 8 bit and 10 bit panels. I want to think it's a marketing thing. Samsung uses 8 bit panels.

**davidjschenk** · 12-09-2009, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by gmarceau

I'd check home theater mag.

The xbr9 does not have the lowest black level of any display. Who knows how these guys test, but they've got an lnb650 beating out the sammy 8500 in blacks!?!?

The blacks on the V series get deep, they've been tested at .008 ft/L in HTMag (backlight at minimum), along with the XBR9. That's a deeper number than 0.05 cd/m, correct me if I'm wrong. With some ambient light in the room, the black bars are inky black. With the lights off, not quite as much. Put the set in eco mode with the backlight at minimum in a dark room, and you've got CRT blacks, but a dim picture.

Hi gmarceau,

No, as you suspect, Televisioninfo's reported black level results are plain nonsense. I suspect interference from hard drug use.

With my backlight at 5 out of a possible 10, on my Samsung 8500 I consistently get a 0% stimulus Y value of anywhere from 0.0000 to 0.0008 (most often 0.0007). Even on the high end, that is literally ten times better than what HTMag reports for the Vs and XBR9s. Let me bring down my backlight some, and I'll really give you some impressive numbers! An lnb650, on the other hand, won't even break 0.00X most of the time; I generally get 0.01-something.

Oh--since people mentioned it, the biggest complaint the calibrators had against the XBR9 at ValueElectronics' shootout was its raging inconsistency. Calibrated settings that yielded great results on Tuesday would give horrid numbers on Wednesday, where the only thing that was changed between those two days was the little "X" on the calendar on the wall. As a spectator, I also was very unhappy with its mura and visibly erratic grayscale. The grayscale especially pissed me off.

Yours,

David

**ImRizzo** · 12-09-2009, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by davidjschenk

Hi gmarceau,

No, as you suspect, Televisioninfo's reported black level results are plain nonsense. I suspect interference from hard drug use.

With my backlight at 5 out of a possible 10, on my Samsung 8500 I consistently get a 0% stimulus Y value of anywhere from 0.0000 to 0.0008 (most often 0.0007). Even on the high end, that is literally ten times better than what HTMag reports for the Vs and XBR9s. Let me bring down my backlight some, and I'll really give you some impressive numbers! An lnb650, on the other hand, won't even break 0.00X most of the time; I generally get 0.01-something.

Oh--since people mentioned it, the biggest complaint the calibrators had against the XBR9 at ValueElectronics' shootout was its raging inconsistency. Calibrated settings that yielded great results on Tuesday would give horrid numbers on Wednesday, where the only thing that was changed between those two days was the little "X" on the calendar on the wall. As a spectator, I also was very unhappy with its mura and visibly erratic grayscale. The grayscale especially pissed me off.

Yours,

David

I had to oportunity to see the XBR8 at the Sony outlet here on LI, truthfully I was very disappointed with this $$$$$ product there were several other Sony displays playing in the same room so a side by side was easy. I just can't see where this set can command such a high tariff, hopefully the XBR10's will have something better to show.

**davidjschenk** · 12-09-2009, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by ImRizzo

I had to oportunity to see the XBR8 at the Sony outlet here on LI, truthfully I was very disappointed with this $$$$$ product there were several other Sony displays playing in the same room so a side by side was easy. I just can't see where this set can command such a high tariff, hopefully the XBR10's will have something better to show.

Hi Rizzo,

Sorry, but from what I saw, the 10 is nothing to write home about either. I mean, it's a good LCD TV, to be sure, but it doesn't compete with the top sets. The 11 and 12, on the other hand, look very, very promising. Those and Toshiba's new Cell are the ones I'm most anxious to check out.

Yours,

David

**dsskid** · 12-09-2009, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by gmarceau

I'd check home theater mag.

The xbr9 does not have the lowest black level of any display. Who knows how these guys test, but they've got an lnb650 beating out the sammy 8500 in blacks!?!?

The blacks on the V series get deep, they've been tested at .008 ft/L in HTMag (backlight at minimum), along with the XBR9. That's a deeper number than 0.05 cd/m, correct me if I'm wrong. With some ambient light in the room, the black bars are inky black. With the lights off, not quite as much. Put the set in eco mode with the backlight at minimum in a dark room, and you've got CRT blacks, but a dim picture.

Personally, I'd be interested in what someone could get on a black level reading with backlight at minimum and brightness @ 51 (this gives the deepest black I've seen, as the backlight dims until 51 on a full black screen). dsskid, what was the backlight at when you measured blacks?

Advanced contrast enhancer, say what you will about the feature, but it actually increases contrast, at least when I eyeball it. Whites get whiter and blacks get deeper. At the medium setting, if there is a dark enough picture on screen, the screen will dim, but setting it again on high will allow the whites to creep back up again. Auto-dimming is a kind of non-issue now with firmware updates.

I've actually found myself resetting white balance and putting hue at 0. I could never get acceptable saturation with hue set off of 0, although this is supposedly closer to industry standard. Color at 46-47 is nice, but put the hue at R4 or G5 or which ever method is giving more accuracy, it doesn't look right when color saturation increases. It does look excellent at around 40 on color, however, when these calibration numbers are put in.

I also can't tell the difference between 8 bit and 10 bit panels. I want to think it's a marketing thing. Samsung uses 8 bit panels.

Minimum

With color set at 40, the picture looks more natural, and and along with a hue of R4, the gamut primaries and secondaries are very, very good. (at least on my display, and in my environment...darkened room.) But of course, you have a differnet tv, and your environment is most likely different, so to get the most accurate picture, you'd need to have yours calibrated.

**dsskid** · 12-09-2009, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by davidjschenk

Hi gmarceau,

No, as you suspect, Televisioninfo's reported black level results are plain nonsense. I suspect interference from hard drug use.

With my backlight at 5 out of a possible 10, on my Samsung 8500 I consistently get a 0% stimulus Y value of anywhere from 0.0000 to 0.0008 (most often 0.0007). Even on the high end, that is literally ten times better than what HTMag reports for the Vs and XBR9s. Let me bring down my backlight some, and I'll really give you some impressive numbers! An lnb650, on the other hand, won't even break 0.00X most of the time; I generally get 0.01-something.

Oh--since people mentioned it, the biggest complaint the calibrators had against the XBR9 at ValueElectronics' shootout was its raging inconsistency. Calibrated settings that yielded great results on Tuesday would give horrid numbers on Wednesday, where the only thing that was changed between those two days was the little "X" on the calendar on the wall. As a spectator, I also was very unhappy with its mura and visibly erratic grayscale. The grayscale especially pissed me off.

Yours,

David

David, what meter are you using?

**aim120** · 12-10-2009, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by davidjschenk

Hi gmarceau,

No, as you suspect, Televisioninfo's reported black level results are plain nonsense. I suspect interference from hard drug use.

well they did say the scores was with local dimming disabled.after enabling it they say the black levels was about 0.02 which is the lowest of they have measured.
well to measure lower blacks i guess they should have used bigger sized black & white checkered pattern.

**davidjschenk** · 12-10-2009, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by dsskid

David, what meter are you using?

A brand new modified Chroma 5 from SpectraCal with CalMAN.

Yours,

David

**dsskid** · 12-10-2009, 08:16 AM

Originally Posted by davidjschenk

A brand new modified Chroma 5 from SpectraCal with CalMAN.

Yours,

David

Nice meter.

I had been using a Eyeone Pro with CalMAN (and still occasionally do), but I upgraded to a Sencore OTC1000 (with CalMAN) about a month and a half ago. I'm very pleased with it's accuracy and speed.

Happy Calibrating.

**gmarceau** · 12-10-2009, 05:35 PM

Taking a guess here, but I'm thinking that Sony made the V series based on the same panel as the xbr6. This might explain the viewing angles being better along with other pluses for the V this year. They definitely used a new panel for the W, Z, and XBR, but they might be slightly blacker on axis, yet they have a host of other issues that weren't addressed in an effort to make a profitable panel, but also one with great blacks.

Chi Mei is known to have issues with some of their older panels, as well, with regards to great contrast ratios at the expense of viewing angle and greyscale. Not to say they sourced from them, but who knows anymore.

dsskid, yeah, no offense meant in regards to your settings, I do need a proper calibration to get the most out of my set. I'm glad you were able to give me such a good starting point. I just nitpick this stuff to death, so I finally go back to the beginning and leave it as it is, if things don't seem to bother me too much.

This tv was a hold me over until Panasonic gets things together in the next couple years with their plasmas (hoping for 9G Kuro blacks this year), or Sony and Samsung start using their next gen panels promising better motion, blacks, and viewing angles.

**dsskid** · 12-10-2009, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by gmarceau

Taking a guess here, but I'm thinking that Sony made the V series based on the same panel as the xbr6. This might explain the viewing angles being better along with other pluses for the V this year. They definitely used a new panel for the W, Z, and XBR, but they might be slightly blacker on axis, yet they have a host of other issues that weren't addressed in an effort to make a profitable panel, but also one with great blacks.

Chi Mei is known to have issues with some of their older panels, as well, with regards to great contrast ratios at the expense of viewing angle and greyscale. Not to say they sourced from them, but who knows anymore.

dsskid, yeah, no offense meant in regards to your settings, I do need a proper calibration to get the most out of my set. I'm glad you were able to give me such a good starting point. I just nitpick this stuff to death, so I finally go back to the beginning and leave it as it is, if things don't seem to bother me too much.

This tv was a hold me over until Panasonic gets things together in the next couple years with their plasmas (hoping for 9G Kuro blacks this year), or Sony and Samsung start using their next gen panels promising better motion, blacks, and viewing angles.

None taken. As I stated, the calibration settings that I posted were from a calibration that I performed on my dispaly, in my rooms environment. It's a longshot that my settings would be perfect for you unless your display had the exact factory settings, and your room's environment was exactly like mine. They are meant to get you in the ballpark, where you can further tweak it to your room's environment or to taste.

Where do you live? I can perform a calibration for you if you're in the NY area.

**gmarceau** · 12-11-2009, 07:25 AM

I'm in south eastern Ohio now. 31 and I'm back in graduate school, so calibration will have to wait

Actually, I'm happy with the tv for what it is. I'm really holding out for 2011-12 stuff. This Sony is more than I could have hoped for, since I had a Sammy last year, but returned it because of the black level. It really seemed like a light box in the dark. Needed a decent tv for the apartment. My xbr960 was awesome for the time I had it, but honestly, the picture on this Sony is not far off. In some ways, even better.

Much appreciated, though

**aim120** · 12-13-2009, 12:30 AM

Originally Posted by gmarceau

Taking a guess here, but I'm thinking that Sony made the V series based on the same panel as the xbr6. This might explain the viewing angles being better along with other pluses for the V this year. They definitely used a new panel for the W, Z, and XBR, but they might be slightly blacker on axis, yet they have a host of other issues that weren't addressed in an effort to make a profitable panel, but also one with great blacks.

Chi Mei is known to have issues with some of their older panels, as well, with regards to great contrast ratios at the expense of viewing angle and greyscale. Not to say they sourced from them, but who knows anymore.

dsskid, yeah, no offense meant in regards to your settings, I do need a proper calibration to get the most out of my set. I'm glad you were able to give me such a good starting point. I just nitpick this stuff to death, so I finally go back to the beginning and leave it as it is, if things don't seem to bother me too much.

This tv was a hold me over until Panasonic gets things together in the next couple years with their plasmas (hoping for 9G Kuro blacks this year), or Sony and Samsung start using their next gen panels promising better motion, blacks, and viewing angles.

well sony doesn't source its panels from chi mei,they only source them from S lcd a joint sony/samsung venture,AU optronics and very recently from sharp like sony 65W5100.

now AU optronics/samsung make varies types of 40"/46" panel with different specs.if you get a tv with better viewing angles its a AU panel,the SPVA from samsung has slightly better blacks on AXIS but higher contrast shift at off axis.