P

Phil750

Audiophyte
I am wanting to purchase one of the new Sharps 70 inch Tv 2012 model. I am unsure about other bloggers but to me of all the TV’s I have looked at Sharp was the winner. In addition I have been a subscriber to Sound and Vision when it was Stereo Review. Home Theatre when it first came out. I still don’t understand the need to to do all these calibrations and adjustments. What looks good to the reviewer might not to me. So I do like most people buy what I can afford an what has the best picture for the money. I have to admit I read reviews but I still half the time have no idea what they are talking about.
I was curious if other readers understand, and what makes you the reader buy a certain model? Can you really see a difference that will just blow you away. It’s like cables. I requested some literature from Audio Quest about 10 years ago on their cables they sent me a brochure that would require an Electrical Engineer to understand.
I have tried different cables. I listened and listened and could not tell the difference. Same with HDMI cables. I was just wanting other input about readers and what they buy and why. Please if you answer this don’t use terms that Engineers need to understand
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
If you want the best picture quality, Sharp doesn't have it. Samsung does. IMO, Sharp IS very good, but I've owned a few Samsungs, and currently own both a Sharp and a Samsung. If you don't have a solid idea what the reviews are talking about, then the Sharp will probably be fine for you, as the things they are mainly going to pick on in a review are not necessarily things that "average" viewers are going to care about. When I read reviews, I look at the problem areas first, not the best qualities, since any glaring issues are really what would be a deal breaker. I am not knocking Sharp either, and I am not disappointed with the one I have, but I bought a less expensive Samsung and found that even that had a better picture than my larger Sharp. I found the same when I looked at the larger sets which is why I kept with Samsung on my new display.

What Audioquest sent you was fluff. Technical mumbo-jumbo that doesn't translate into meaningful differences.
 
Last edited:
darien87

darien87

Audioholic Spartan
I agree with John. Sharp isn't the best but they're the only ones making a 70" TV right now and their TV's are good for the price you pay. I was just recently looking at their 2011 70" because it had a matte screen and reflections were an issue for me. I thought the picture was good, but not great. Unfortunately I really hate the "soap-opera" look that LCD anti-motion blur gives you. The store was playing Avatar and it just looked a little weird to me.

I ended up going with a 64" Samsung plasma because it had a better picture, no motion blur, and at the time was on sale for about $500 less than the Sharp.

I also agree with John in that it sounds like you're not a videophile and that the picture quality of the Sharp will probably be just fine for you. It's a good set, I'm sure you'll be happy with it.
 
F

FirstReflection

AV Rant Co-Host
I am wanting to purchase one of the new Sharps 70 inch Tv 2012 model. I am unsure about other bloggers but to me of all the TV’s I have looked at Sharp was the winner. In addition I have been a subscriber to Sound and Vision when it was Stereo Review. Home Theatre when it first came out. I still don’t understand the need to to do all these calibrations and adjustments. What looks good to the reviewer might not to me. So I do like most people buy what I can afford an what has the best picture for the money. I have to admit I read reviews but I still half the time have no idea what they are talking about.
I was curious if other readers understand, and what makes you the reader buy a certain model? Can you really see a difference that will just blow you away. It’s like cables. I requested some literature from Audio Quest about 10 years ago on their cables they sent me a brochure that would require an Electrical Engineer to understand.
I have tried different cables. I listened and listened and could not tell the difference. Same with HDMI cables. I was just wanting other input about readers and what they buy and why. Please if you answer this don’t use terms that Engineers need to understand
Displays (TVs) are the only part of the audio/video system that actually have industry standard specifications.

When a director and editor are making a TV show or a movie, they use a display that is calibrated to this industry standard. You can go to any production house - any movie or TV studio's editing room - and the display will look the same!

This consistency throughout the entire industry is vital. If a director wants a certain detail in the picture to be visible, or he/she wants it to be obscured by a shadow or a bright white light, that director needs for every display he/she works on to look exactly the same. If one display shows a detail in a shadow or a highlight and another display does not, the director can't tell what the viewer is actually going to see!

Colors are also all calibrated to the exact same specifications. There is a chart that describes all of the colors we see as coordinates on a graph. You can literally describe any color that humans can see as a set of numbers. So every display that a director or editor uses must display every color exactly as described by these coordinate numbers. No matter what editing room they use, red should be red, green should be green, blue should be blue, white should be white, with no variation from display to display.

So with this industry standard - where every display on the production side looks exactly the same - the director can make the movie or TV show look EXACTLY the way he/she wants it to. The colors are exactly how the director wants them to look. The details in the shadows and highlights are visible or obscured according to how the director wants them to look. And the director can view all of these details on any display in the entire industry, and they will look the same, because every display has been calibrated to the same industry standard.

So, naturally, if you want to see any movie or TV show and have it look exactly the way the director intended, you want to calibrate your own TV to that same industry standard!

Makes sense, no? :)

So that is what reviewers are talking about when it comes to calibration. How close are they able to bring whatever TV they are reviewing to the industry standard? Not all consumer televisions are capable of being calibrated to the industry spec. Some TVs, no matter how much you adjust their settings, are still inaccurate.

So calibration isn't about personal preference. It isn't about what looks good to you vs. what looks good to someone else. There is an actual, definable "right" and "wrong".

There are instruments that can measure light output and can measure colors and spit out the coordinate numbers that go with the color graph. So we can measure to see whether a TV is outputting the exact right color or white level according to what is in the signal.

And, if you're wondering why every consumer TV isn't simply pre-calibrated to the industry standard at the factory, you have to realize that what we see and what we measure depends on the lighting in the room. In a pitch black room, a TV can be pre-calibrated. That is actually what the THX mode on a THX TV is - it is a pre-calibrated mode, but it is only perfectly accurate in a pitch black room. As soon as you turn on any light, your eye becomes biased by that light, and what you see from the TV is not longer the same as the industry standard.

Just think of it this way - your eye takes in all the light that is in any room. So the light that is coming from the TV gets combined with any light in the room, so now it is not just the light coming from the TV. What you want is for the light that actually enters your eye to be the light that the director intended. So you have to adjust the TV to compensate for any light that is in the room, so that the light that actually reaches your eye (which is a combination of the TV's light and the ambient light in the room) is actually what the director saw in the editiing room with his/her calibrated professional display.

In the end, being 100% perfect is almost impossible. You can never fully account for every possible room's lighting and every variance from consumer display to consumer display. But you can come darn close to the industry standard, and that is what display calibration is all about. :)
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
I will say that I've now installed 3 of the new 70" Sharp LCDs and this years models, for whatever reason, look significantly better than last years model. There is less false contouring and a far cleaner overall image compared to what I saw last year.

Last year I did not buy the Sharp 70" LCD because I was disappointed with the image quality. This year I would happily buy it and recommend it to others.

Does it look as good as my 64" Samsung plasma?

No, it does not.

But, compared to the 65" Samsung, the pricing is better and the image quality is very good. No, not better, but certainly not at all objectionable.
 
F

FirstReflection

AV Rant Co-Host
Hey, BMX :)

Which exact models have you been installing? LC-70LE745U? Or LC-70LE845U? And which was the 2011 model that disappointed you? LC-70LE735U? Or the less expensive, 2D-only LC-70LE732U or LC-70LE734U?

I just haven't been able to get past the edge-LED lighting on the new 2012 models so far. High hopes for the full-array, local-dimming 900 series models though :)

I know you've said the contouring - by which I'm assuming you mean posterization - really bugged you on the 2011 model. I'm fairly convinced at this point that there were some pretty big unit-to-unit variations when it came to posterization on last year's 70" models. My own LC-70LE735U does show some posterization, but it isn't nearly as bad as what some folks have described. I've read accounts from people who seem to be seeing about the same amount of posterization as I'm seeing on my set, and some folks who seem to be seeing far worse posterization, so there seems to be some unit-to-unit differences.

I dunno, I tend to think different people key in on different, specific picture quality drawbacks. I can tolerate a touch of posterization since I'm pretty much only using my LC-70LE735U for videogames and TV, and not so much for Blu-ray. My cable feed has posterization in it anyway - even shows up on my Kuro, which is flawless with Blu-rays - so the little bit of posterization in my Sharp doesn't really look any worse than my crappy cable feed anyway :p It would probably bug me more if this were my primary Blu-ray display though ;)

What I can't tolerate, personally, though is uneven illumination. And on that front, the new edge-LED 2012 models look worse to my eyes than the full-array (though NOT local-dimming) 2011 models. The 2012 so far just have that edge-LED problem where, from even the slightest off angle, the screen illumination just goes all wonky and the far side of the screen looks much lighter and washed out than the near side of the screen. For me, that just bugs me more :p

Overall, I've gotta say I've been very happy with my 2011 LC-70LE735U. But then again, I bought it for a specific purpose under specific room conditions and made sure it fit for MY circumstances. I wanted a display for "lights on" TV and videogame purposes, and the LC-70LE735U has been a champ for those conditions. It's nice a bright. It can really crank out the brightness for any 3D content, which is awesome (and necessary! Since the 3D glasses cut about 60-65% of the light output by my estimation!). The semi-matte screen keeps the reflections to a minimum. And it retains its black levels under lighting far better than my Kuro, which tends to look a bit grey and dull when the lights are on.

With the lights off and Blu-ray content though, it's no contest between the Kuro and the Sharp. The Kuro just chews it up and spits it out! But with the lights on and more casual content? Gotta say, the Sharp looks better than the Kuro - and that was the whole idea! So it's all a matter of getting the right display for the right set of conditions. I'm glad I've got a choice of both displays though ;)
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
Which exact models have you been installing? LC-70LE745U? Or LC-70LE845U?
I've been installing the 745U.

And which was the 2011 model that disappointed you? LC-70LE735U? Or the less expensive, 2D-only LC-70LE732U or LC-70LE734U?
The 734U was the one I installed several times. I think someone may have had a 735U as well... I'm not sure on that one since I didn't spec it for them.

I just haven't been able to get past the edge-LED lighting on the new 2012 models so far. High hopes for the full-array, local-dimming 900 series models though :)
I gotta say that the TV was never in a 'critical' viewing environment ever, and my desire would not be in my 'critical' area - that would get my Samsung 64" plasma. But, it would be used as my general purpose family room display. So, while it may not be as 'sharp' as the Samsungs are for overall quality, and certainly not a Panny plasma, they are still much improved upon from last year in terms of motion handling and general processing.

While not a flawless display, I still feel better about this year's model compared to last years model and am hopeful they will continue with the improvements. Always good when things go in the right direction. Of course the tech switch to edge lighting may be a backwards step, but I guess that's what their 900 series is all about.

I would only be getting the 80" anyway, so I get the full array no matter what!

Grrrr.... first buy new house, then think about electronic toys for myself again.
 
V

Vochslu

Audiophyte
I would never buy a Sharp TV at all unless it was the Elite that is pretty much crafted by Pioneer. Even in their 8 series TV's (2012's Quatron) local dimming is very horrible for these. Even if your sitting directly in front of it. I sell TV's for a living and I look at hundreds of models on a daily basis. Samsung's are overly bright on their LED's and their plasmas have the the judder of a 60hz lcd from 3 years ago. When you have 24p working while using a blu-ray the Samsung plasma look very nice of course as far as motion goes.

I would probably take a 60E530 which is Samsung's outsourced POS model this year over the Sharp (even Quatron). Meanwhile the question is at hand is the extra calibration feature necessary for the Quatron? Well, I wouldn't pay anyone to do it, you can do it yourself. After spending 20 mins in the store messing with the calibration on the 70LE847 (this year's quatron), I finally can get it to compete with the 60ES6100 from Samsung, on brightness and color contrast.

To make a long story short, you will not find a good quality picture in any LED over 65". unless you goto the Elite. If you have to go large, hopefully you don't have a super bright room, you should get a Mitsubishi DLP diamond series or better. If you have a bright room of course you will want LED, there is no better TV than Sony. Yes the XBR is always a good choice and no matter what anyone tells me it's by far the best LED on the market. However, overall best picture quality would have to be a 65vt30 (2011 model), I've seen them online for $2300. If price is an issue buy that TV online somewhere. The VT's from Panasonic have been the most highly sought after TV's for the past 5 years now for a reason. Best dark levels and the most realistic color contrast. For plasma's its the best you can get even for a bright room, unless you buy into LG's new line-up of Plasma's that have a new matte finish on them. I have not been able to see one yet. The VT has a polarized panel on it that kinda works like Sunglasses, while it's still glass and it's still going to reflect more than LED, its not going to be a mirror image like most plasma's. The viewing angles on it are perfect as well and has the highest rated 3d on the market. If your the average consumer who doesn't care about 3d, get over it, there is not a 2d tv on the market that will compete in picture quality than any of the 3d TV's from your top manufacturers. At least if you decide in a couple years you want to try out 3d, you have the best TV to try it on.

If you have to go LED on a budget, go for the Sony KDL55HX850. Yes it's smaller and it's not full-array but you put standard mode on that with any other LED (also on standard mode) on the market and it will have the best picture quality. The black levels on it are amazing for an LED and the motion is definitely over-kill. There is no reason for an XR960 but you will never have any judder, ever.

Don't go Sharp unless your going ELITE. Drop a size at least and get the VT online for cheaper, unless you were going to buy the 640 or something. If you do go Sharp, make sure it says Quatron in the upper left hand corner of the screen, if it doesn't, Sharp didn't make it. (edit) at least not all of it anyway...
 
Last edited:
M

Maestral

Audiophyte
3 d glasses SHARP AN-3DG20-B (AQUOS)

Hi, I have a questions about sharp 3D glasses.I bought in in Austria in sharp shop, but it doesn't function-What remains to be in the system that would work (some port that connects to the TV?)
with the ordinary (cardboard) 3D glasses I can watch 3D movies (but lower quality, Image - kills color), so TV is obviously 3D ready.
Do You know what' s wrong?
Thank You all!!
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
What are you trying to play back in 3D?

Are you using a 3D Blu-ray player over HDMI to the TV or are you trying to do something else? I'm not sure, but you may need to sync up the glasses with the TV, and I'm assuming you bought Sharp 3D glasses, not some generic ones.
 
newsletter

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