Here come New Brands of OLED TV's!

  • Thread starter Jeffrey S. Albaugh
  • Start date
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
Inkjet is actually one of the current gen processes for OLED and is beginning to be replaced by a new process that should help bring costs down. My company is involved in that next technology for producing OLED and also in flexible OLED. In fact, the title for our division was changed from Display to Display and Flexible Technology just yesterday.

One of the other factors is the size of the equipment needed to make a large TV panel for either LCD or OLED. It is literally the size of a small house and the full scale one is nearly a block long.

There's a lot of stuff I can't say :)
 
Last edited:
Auditor55

Auditor55

Audioholic General
Plasma is obsolete, since no one is producing new ones. (Dead, dead, dead). OLED is the future, but don't expect it from Sony & Samsung. They don't want to join any other group. Irregardless, 4K WILL GO AWAY, AS THEIR SETS CONTINUE TO PLUMMET DOWNWARDS in price. Help is on it's way soon. 6 other manufacturers are getting in to OLED. Panasonic; most notable. Don't look for other names from the past are gone. These guys have faded away into the fog. No more Mitsushitty, Hitachi, Sanyo, Sharp, etc. There are new Companies that have bought up some of the old ones such as TCL & Hisense. Don't laugh at these companies. They are coming on strong. Samsung SUHD doesn't compare to OLED. Neither does Sony.

As for Kuro; this is stupid talk. It came out in 2008, and by 2009, they quit making them. They surely are obsolete to the point that OLED blows them away. None of these others can produce infinite contrast ratio, no backlighting whatsoever (just a temp crutch). OLED: best color, best off axis viewing, fastest refresh rates. Just give up on the old technologies of the past (they had on HDMI, 4K, Smartness, streaming apps, and on and on. Get with the program.
These statements are not accurate.


This is mostly accurate. It's the crux of the entire argument, but doesn't support your other statements, it also ignores the most important thing.

If OLED is PROFITABLE, it will not die. It will remain on the market. It must not only be price competitive with whatever else is out there, but it must make the manufacturer (LG at this time) a profit. If LG is profitable, with a better looking display than others, at a price competitive point, then whatever anyone else makes is irrelevant. Completely. It's about profitability.


Plasma is not obsolete, as the best looking plasmas (Pioneer Kuro) still look better than any other LCD out there, and arguably as good/better than OLED.

But, it goes back to the crux of the statement: Plasma is not a price competitive technology while retaining profitability. To get them thin, quality went down, to lower production and shipping costs quality went down. By the time the plasma was redesigned to be LCD thin, it had cost a ton of money, they didn't have the black levels of a Kuro, and LCD/LED was pushing brightness, while increasing viewing angles to an acceptable level for a similar price, but with higher profitability.

Pioneer lost tens of millions on Kuros. Even at their high price, it wasn't profitable, so they left that industry behind. It wasn't about them being price competitive, but profitable.

LG doesn't cornerstone their flat panel market with OLED. They have dozens of different TVs at all sizes, in all types of LCD configurations. They reserve OLED at the upper end of the spectrum to compete against Samsung and others who have those better displays. If LG isn't making a profit at competitive prices, then I agree 100%, that OLED will die out.
But, this doesn't require any more manufacturers. It requires profitability. That's it.
These statements are not accurate.


This is mostly accurate. It's the crux of the entire argument, but doesn't support your other statements, it also ignores the most important thing.

If OLED is PROFITABLE, it will not die. It will remain on the market. It must not only be price competitive with whatever else is out there, but it must make the manufacturer (LG at this time) a profit. If LG is profitable, with a better looking display than others, at a price competitive point, then whatever anyone else makes is irrelevant. Completely. It's about profitability.


Plasma is not obsolete, as the best looking plasmas (Pioneer Kuro) still look better than any other LCD out there, and arguably as good/better than OLED.

But, it goes back to the crux of the statement: Plasma is not a price competitive technology while retaining profitability. To get them thin, quality went down, to lower production and shipping costs quality went down. By the time the plasma was redesigned to be LCD thin, it had cost a ton of money, they didn't have the black levels of a Kuro, and LCD/LED was pushing brightness, while increasing viewing angles to an acceptable level for a similar price, but with higher profitability.

Pioneer lost tens of millions on Kuros. Even at their high price, it wasn't profitable, so they left that industry behind. It wasn't about them being price competitive, but profitable.

LG doesn't cornerstone their flat panel market with OLED. They have dozens of different TVs at all sizes, in all types of LCD configurations. They reserve OLED at the upper end of the spectrum to compete against Samsung and others who have those better displays. If LG isn't making a profit at competitive prices, then I agree 100%, that OLED will die out.
But, this doesn't require any more manufacturers. It requires profitability. That's it.
Lets define "Obsolete":

adjective
1.
no longer in general use; fallen into disuse:
an obsolete expression.
2.
of a discarded or outmoded type; out of date:
an obsolete battleship.


In view of the above definition, I think that Plasma fall right into that description.


How can OLED be profitable if no sets are being sold? When I say sold I mean to the degree you see 4K LED set being sold. I don't believe a few $3,000-$4,500 Lg sets on the market will get in done. Without the others, there won't be any competition so prices will remain high.

Pioneer Kuro's weren't profitable because there prices were too high, especially when TV's prices, do to popularity of LCD/LED, were going down to the point that your prototypical consumer could afford them. Pioneer didn't have a LCD/LED so they couldn't compete.

Also, and people on HT/Audio forums like this just can't seem to get it, deep blacks like the Kuro offered and the deep blacks of OLED, are not really selling points to the masses, they don't give rats back side about deep blacks and/or infinite blacks. They want the biggest, brightest TV with the most over-saturated colors their money can buy, an fortunately for them, 4K LED/LCD have all of that and then some, that is why they now dominate the market and rendered plasma obsolete. All those folks you might have seen waiting in line on black Friday, stampeding and trampling each other for one of the $300 4K LED sets, I'm guessing are probably not too concerned with infinite blacks.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
Lets define "Obsolete":

adjective
1.
no longer in general use; fallen into disuse:
an obsolete expression.
2.
of a discarded or outmoded type; out of date:
an obsolete battleship.


In view of the above definition, I think that Plasma fall right into that description.
Yes, as I said, plasma is dead. Certainly in 'disuse', but as an imaging technology, it's still a gold standard. CRT, by the same token, has black levels that even Kuro displays couldn't touch.

Anyone who says "OLED crushes plasma" - has no idea what they are talking about because people who have compared the two, directly, will tell you that's not the case.

How can OLED be profitable if no sets are being sold? When I say sold I mean to the degree you see 4K LED set being sold. I don't believe a few $3,000-$4,500 Lg sets on the market will get in done. Without the others, there won't be any competition so prices will remain high.
Because, you see, profitability means profitability, it doesn't demand 10 million units be moved. Since you call it a 'FEW' I am assuming you have actual numbers and have some idea of how many units actually are selling and that when you ask how it can be profitable, you know that LG is taking a loss?

Profitability is based upon making money. It isn't strictly about quantity, it's about how much you earn per unit sold and if that covers all associated costs. Since LG makes a lot more than OLED, they can piggy back dozens of costs with their other displays, which reduces costs.

As for 'competition', that's a joke right? You literally go on to talk about LCD technology and how everyone is buying it. What do you think that is? That's competition. Samsung's higher end displays are direct competition in both size and cost, and arguably quality when compared to LG's OLED tech. That's exactly what will drive cost. If they refine the technology and can get it into more displays, at lower prices, then mid-tier LCD displays will find themselves fighting against OLED as well.

Pioneer Kuro's weren't profitable because there prices were too high, especially when TV's prices, do to popularity of LCD/LED, were going down to the point that your prototypical consumer could afford them. Pioneer didn't have a LCD/LED so they couldn't compete.
Pioneer's pricing was actually low for the quality of the displays, but they certainly didn't sell enough. They lost millions in the final years on Kuro. Perhaps with an LCD tech they could have gone that route, but much like Panasonic, they didn't plan for a post-plasma world. LG doesn't have that issue. They are operating both within the LCD world and advancing that technology at the same time they are pushing beyond LCD with OLED.

It doesn't diminish the quality of the quality plasma display no matter what comes along.

Also, and people on HT/Audio forums like this just can't seem to get it, deep blacks like the Kuro offered and the deep blacks of OLED, are not really selling points to the masses, they don't give rats back side about deep blacks and/or infinite blacks.
Obviously, people on these forums get quality over other stuff, it doesn't mean we don't get it. It seems that Samsung and LG must be really stupid since they have high-end models with superior contrast and better image quality for a fair bit more cash. They must not get it just like those of us on these forums.

You can tell that's just not reality. LG gets it, Samsung gets it. They make quality displays and mid-level displays, and cheap displays. Panasonic, after having one of the best plasmas on the market for years was almost eliminated from the game with no technology at all, and now is working their way back in with some mid-tier TVs which are very slowly making their way back into stores. Quite a shift from being one of the most recommended brands out there.

I think the lesson is that you can't bank on a single technology or a single price point. The most reputable, or at least the most well known brands, tend to work throughout all the price categories with many different level of product. It maintains their profits and allows for a top-down approach to design which can improve their lower-level offerings with some of the newest tech.
 
J

Jeffrey S. Albaugh

Audioholic
These kinds of statements, led me to decide to leave this Forum for good. There sure are a lot of nasty people here, not to my liking. Adious!
 
Auditor55

Auditor55

Audioholic General
Yes, as I said, plasma is dead. Certainly in 'disuse', but as an imaging technology, it's still a gold standard. CRT, by the same token, has black levels that even Kuro displays couldn't touch.

Anyone who says "OLED crushes plasma" - has no idea what they are talking about because people who have compared the two, directly, will tell you that's not the case.


Because, you see, profitability means profitability, it doesn't demand 10 million units be moved. Since you call it a 'FEW' I am assuming you have actual numbers and have some idea of how many units actually are selling and that when you ask how it can be profitable, you know that LG is taking a loss?

Profitability is based upon making money. It isn't strictly about quantity, it's about how much you earn per unit sold and if that covers all associated costs. Since LG makes a lot more than OLED, they can piggy back dozens of costs with their other displays, which reduces costs.

As for 'competition', that's a joke right? You literally go on to talk about LCD technology and how everyone is buying it. What do you think that is? That's competition. Samsung's higher end displays are direct competition in both size and cost, and arguably quality when compared to LG's OLED tech. That's exactly what will drive cost. If they refine the technology and can get it into more displays, at lower prices, then mid-tier LCD displays will find themselves fighting against OLED as well.


Pioneer's pricing was actually low for the quality of the displays, but they certainly didn't sell enough. They lost millions in the final years on Kuro. Perhaps with an LCD tech they could have gone that route, but much like Panasonic, they didn't plan for a post-plasma world. LG doesn't have that issue. They are operating both within the LCD world and advancing that technology at the same time they are pushing beyond LCD with OLED.

It doesn't diminish the quality of the quality plasma display no matter what comes along.


Obviously, people on these forums get quality over other stuff, it doesn't mean we don't get it. It seems that Samsung and LG must be really stupid since they have high-end models with superior contrast and better image quality for a fair bit more cash. They must not get it just like those of us on these forums.

You can tell that's just not reality. LG gets it, Samsung gets it. They make quality displays and mid-level displays, and cheap displays. Panasonic, after having one of the best plasmas on the market for years was almost eliminated from the game with no technology at all, and now is working their way back in with some mid-tier TVs which are very slowly making their way back into stores. Quite a shift from being one of the most recommended brands out there.

I think the lesson is that you can't bank on a single technology or a single price point. The most reputable, or at least the most well known brands, tend to work throughout all the price categories with many different level of product. It maintains their profits and allows for a top-down approach to design which can improve their lower-level offerings with some of the newest tech.
I will say it again, Pioneer stop making Plasma TV's because they were not profitable for them. Also, please tell me who evaluated the Plasma vs OLED and preferred plasma.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
I will say it again, Pioneer stop making Plasma TV's because they were not profitable for them. Also, please tell me who evaluated the Plasma vs OLED and preferred plasma.
Yes, Pioneer couldn't make a profit on plasma, which has nothing to do with image quality. Since it was specifically said that since plasma is from 2008 that OLED must blow them away, I wanted to point out how quality is not made obsolete because a product itself is no longer manufactured, and that it is a poor statement.

I Googled for direct comparisons between Kuro and OLED and read several reviews and posts in forums. For the most part, people have opinions, but most did not have the capability of doing direct comparisons, so I tried to get information strictly from those who owned both technologies and could make head-to-head comparisons. Any advantage plasma has (and these are top shelf models) wasn't night and day, and any implication I may have had to that was not meant. Plasma has advantages, but they are small ones, in specific areas. But, it really takes someone owning both, who has no vested interest in demanding one technology be better than the other to be fair in their comparison.

The general consensus seems to be that if you have an absolute top-shelf plasma, like a Kuro, that a straight upgrade to a top shelf OLED will offer a small improvement, but it will be small. Not night and day. Which may make such an investment not worth it. But, if you are looking for a top shelf display, then OLED is the only way to go. Heck, I know if my plasma were to die tomorrow, I would get an OLED to replace it with. Well, at least I would like to. Any manufacturer that I know of in the next couple of years is likely to use LG panels in them anyway.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Warlord
Read today that Sony will start making their own OLED TVs next year. No mention if they'll make the panels or not. That and Samsung and LG are looking at QLED for next year as well. We'll see how this goes.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Warlord
I've got my eye on the Panasonic. Need to see what MSRP will be though...
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top