Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

There is only one way to be happy by means of the heart -- to have none. -- Paul Bourget


aus+uk / uk.tech.digital-tv / Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

SubjectAuthor
* Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sR. Mark Clayton
+* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sthe dog from that film you saw
|`* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sR. Mark Clayton
| +- Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sAndy Burns
| `- Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sthe dog from that film you saw
+* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sAndy Burns
|`* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sR. Mark Clayton
| `* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sAndy Burns
|  `* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sR. Mark Clayton
|   `* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sMark Carver
|    `- Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sR. Mark Clayton
`* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'salan_m
 `* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sPamela
  `* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sJim Lesurf
   `* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sPamela
    +* Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'salan_m
    |`- Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sJim Lesurf
    `- Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV'sJim Lesurf

1
Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=32997&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#32997

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5f06:0:b0:446:e96:b193 with SMTP id fo6-20020ad45f06000000b004460e96b193mr14833451qvb.100.1650453063936;
Wed, 20 Apr 2022 04:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:c892:b0:de:5f75:d8 with SMTP id
er18-20020a056870c89200b000de5f7500d8mr1345635oab.133.1650453063658; Wed, 20
Apr 2022 04:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 04:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:ad72:7b64:5f83:50b2;
posting-account=4hkfSwkAAADcv-_hpUK54e62WKY0FdSL
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:ad72:7b64:5f83:50b2
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
From: notyalck...@gmail.com (R. Mark Clayton)
Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 11:11:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 7
 by: R. Mark Clayton - Wed, 20 Apr 2022 11:11 UTC

Much trumpeted especially in the USA these have now reached the market.

<link>

On Samsung's web site the specification is incomplete, not explicitly stating the ports nor even the tuner(s), a manual download only gets you the first two pages and a leading trade magazine reports that they will use third grade OLED panels: -

https://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-is-still-planning-to-launch-standard-oled-tvs-using-lgs-cheapest-panels

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<GpW7K.606359$7F2.243103@fx12.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33001&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33001

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx12.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.0
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
From: dsb...@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com (the dog from that film you saw)
In-Reply-To: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 220420-2, 20/4/2022), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <GpW7K.606359$7F2.243103@fx12.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse(at)newshosting.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 16:20:54 UTC
Organization: Newshosting.com - Highest quality at a great price! www.newshosting.com
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 17:20:53 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 1769
 by: the dog from that fi - Wed, 20 Apr 2022 16:20 UTC

On 20/04/2022 12:11, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> Much trumpeted especially in the USA these have now reached the market.
>
> <link>
>
> On Samsung's web site the specification is incomplete, not explicitly stating the ports nor even the tuner(s), a manual download only gets you the first two pages and a leading trade magazine reports that they will use third grade OLED panels: -
>
> https://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-is-still-planning-to-launch-standard-oled-tvs-using-lgs-cheapest-panels
>

they also have sets with their own oled panels that are apparently
superior to lg ones. only thing is they don't have dolby vision but not
to worry, sony have a model using the new samsung panel if you're happy
to pay the premium.

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33003&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33003

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: use...@andyburns.uk (Andy Burns)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 06:51:40 +0100
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net bsaXuoC2OJDeh/ozSM8tpw3NTD2BPJxBb1xSTyfUEam8r03tG8
Cancel-Lock: sha1:PcOiLEO4NBRwCR0AKN+4hqFcke0=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Andy Burns - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 05:51 UTC

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> I think they need to do better than this...

So save up for an S95B or A95K ...

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33004&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33004

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: jun...@admac.myzen.co.uk (alan_m)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 08:42:27 +0100
Organization: At Home
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: news@admac.myzen.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net DJvertQB2Nxt8JKDLzKHfQTdYQ5T+u+c9n1G7CFc1GiDoZTIIA
Cancel-Lock: sha1:nTiHeprBl7NSkI2+dlju3SU1lPQ=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
 by: alan_m - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 07:42 UTC

On 20/04/2022 12:11, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> Much trumpeted especially in the USA these have now reached the market.
>
> <link>
>
> On Samsung's web site the specification is incomplete, not explicitly stating the ports nor even the tuner(s), a manual download only gets you the first two pages and a leading trade magazine reports that they will use third grade OLED panels: -
>
> https://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-is-still-planning-to-launch-standard-oled-tvs-using-lgs-cheapest-panels
>

What Hifi reviewing and commenting on TVs? This often the Russ Andrews
type bullshit.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33006&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33006

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:95:b0:2f1:fa51:be58 with SMTP id o21-20020a05622a009500b002f1fa51be58mr13818089qtw.564.1650534965071;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 02:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:2220:b0:322:4891:8a04 with SMTP id
bd32-20020a056808222000b0032248918a04mr3843303oib.132.1650534964719; Thu, 21
Apr 2022 02:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 02:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:6190:dabc:ccc6:e81;
posting-account=4hkfSwkAAADcv-_hpUK54e62WKY0FdSL
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:6190:dabc:ccc6:e81
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com> <jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
From: notyalck...@gmail.com (R. Mark Clayton)
Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:56:05 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 10
 by: R. Mark Clayton - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:56 UTC

On Thursday, 21 April 2022 at 06:51:44 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
> > I think they need to do better than this...
>
> So save up for an S95B or A95K ...

That is what we are talking about: -
https://www.samsung.com/uk/tvs/oled-tv/s95b-55-inch-oled-4k-smart-tv-qe55s95batxxu/
(US version)

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<7c2cd7b5-61a7-470f-b08b-3a61b7a167c7n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33007&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33007

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:6201:b0:2f1:d669:5ee9 with SMTP id hj1-20020a05622a620100b002f1d6695ee9mr16545192qtb.190.1650535253182;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 03:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aca:b01:0:b0:322:f3b5:5457 with SMTP id
1-20020aca0b01000000b00322f3b55457mr2582896oil.60.1650535252851; Thu, 21 Apr
2022 03:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 03:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <GpW7K.606359$7F2.243103@fx12.iad>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:6190:dabc:ccc6:e81;
posting-account=4hkfSwkAAADcv-_hpUK54e62WKY0FdSL
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:6190:dabc:ccc6:e81
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com> <GpW7K.606359$7F2.243103@fx12.iad>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <7c2cd7b5-61a7-470f-b08b-3a61b7a167c7n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
From: notyalck...@gmail.com (R. Mark Clayton)
Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:00:53 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 21
 by: R. Mark Clayton - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:00 UTC

On Wednesday, 20 April 2022 at 17:20:56 UTC+1, the dog from that film you saw wrote:
> On 20/04/2022 12:11, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> > Much trumpeted especially in the USA these have now reached the market.
> >
> > <link>
> >
> > On Samsung's web site the specification is incomplete, not explicitly stating the ports nor even the tuner(s), a manual download only gets you the first two pages and a leading trade magazine reports that they will use third grade OLED panels: -
> >
> > https://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-is-still-planning-to-launch-standard-oled-tvs-using-lgs-cheapest-panels
> >
> they also have sets with their own oled panels that are apparently
> superior to lg ones. only thing is they don't have dolby vision but not
> to worry, sony have a model using the new samsung panel if you're happy
> to pay the premium.

AFAIK Samsung do not make their own OLED panels, but are buying 3rd grade LG ones - LG are keeping the best ones for their own sets.

To be fair AFAICT the only difference is brightness, so in most scenarios they should be OK.

Sony also use LG panels, but I think they get the betters ones: -
https://www.oled-info.com/sony-oled

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<jcd4gsF89teU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33008&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33008

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: use...@andyburns.uk (Andy Burns)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 14:28:58 +0100
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <jcd4gsF89teU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com>
<jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
<f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net bo0BSAz90QUc8WXz/j0sMgWvW2fGbn230DEFsD8bV2CAFI+IQd
Cancel-Lock: sha1:awGqmVwpEiE2KnBCXNnb6lPIkBY=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Andy Burns - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 13:28 UTC

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>>
>>> I think they need to do better than this...
>>
>> So save up for an S95B or A95K ...
>
> That is what we are talking about: -
> https://www.samsung.com/uk/tvs/oled-tv/s95b-55-inch-oled-4k-smart-tv-qe55s95batxxu/
> (US version)

I assumed QN95B was a slightly different model?

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<jcd4k7F89teU2@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33009&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33009

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: use...@andyburns.uk (Andy Burns)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 14:30:46 +0100
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <jcd4k7F89teU2@mid.individual.net>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<GpW7K.606359$7F2.243103@fx12.iad>
<7c2cd7b5-61a7-470f-b08b-3a61b7a167c7n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 58M5JFn7F+LTgHE4dHxSFADfvB0FQmqzVO5A8V/0IB1tbR4fth
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xI3tdRr+wSDca+mbl82BFnQBr9I=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <7c2cd7b5-61a7-470f-b08b-3a61b7a167c7n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Andy Burns - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 13:30 UTC

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

> AFAIK Samsung do not make their own OLED panels, but are buying 3rd grade LG ones - LG are keeping the best ones for their own sets.
> To be fair AFAICT the only difference is brightness, so in most scenarios they should be OK.

Sounds like they may need a little rest between periods of full brightness ...

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<26f92446-e9ee-4745-860d-2110eb8ab61fn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33010&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33010

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2349:b0:444:2a7b:cd5c with SMTP id hu9-20020a056214234900b004442a7bcd5cmr3616040qvb.77.1650637876577;
Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aca:705:0:b0:2d9:6bb6:5b0 with SMTP id 5-20020aca0705000000b002d96bb605b0mr7091581oih.11.1650637876270;
Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jcd4gsF89teU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:f8da:d422:7797:c615;
posting-account=4hkfSwkAAADcv-_hpUK54e62WKY0FdSL
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:f8da:d422:7797:c615
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com> <jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
<f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com> <jcd4gsF89teU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <26f92446-e9ee-4745-860d-2110eb8ab61fn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
From: notyalck...@gmail.com (R. Mark Clayton)
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:31:16 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: R. Mark Clayton - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:31 UTC

On Thursday, 21 April 2022 at 14:29:03 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
> > Andy Burns wrote:
> >
> >> R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think they need to do better than this...
> >>
> >> So save up for an S95B or A95K ...
> >
> > That is what we are talking about: -
> > https://www.samsung.com/uk/tvs/oled-tv/s95b-55-inch-oled-4k-smart-tv-qe55s95batxxu/
> > (US version)
> I assumed QN95B was a slightly different model?

Yes there is some confusion here. The UK model is different because AFAICT it includes a satellite tuner, not present in the US model, and presumably other differences like mains voltage etc.

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<jcfu10Fom35U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33011&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33011

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: mark.car...@invalid.invalid (Mark Carver)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 15:56:31 +0100
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <jcfu10Fom35U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com>
<jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
<f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com>
<jcd4gsF89teU1@mid.individual.net>
<26f92446-e9ee-4745-860d-2110eb8ab61fn@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 3u1AvSi5VsR1W5kdzCKytwD1lsUmUllbxQZ6Ym9sapHY/ftlM=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LYEY8yPhvRRv/Jp5+BgmU6ESb28=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <26f92446-e9ee-4745-860d-2110eb8ab61fn@googlegroups.com>
 by: Mark Carver - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:56 UTC

On 22/04/2022 15:31, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
> Yes there is some confusion here. The UK model is different because AFAICT it includes a satellite tuner, not present in the US model, and presumably other differences like mains voltage etc.
It's been ages since I saw any bit of consumer electronics that wasn't
100(ish) to 250(ish) volts rated ?

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<hMA8K.94382$sMg.17267@fx06.ams1>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33012&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33012

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!193.141.40.65.MISMATCH!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!fx06.ams1.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<GpW7K.606359$7F2.243103@fx12.iad>
<7c2cd7b5-61a7-470f-b08b-3a61b7a167c7n@googlegroups.com>
From: dsb...@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com (the dog from that film you saw)
In-Reply-To: <7c2cd7b5-61a7-470f-b08b-3a61b7a167c7n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 220422-0, 22/4/2022), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <hMA8K.94382$sMg.17267@fx06.ams1>
X-Complaints-To: abuse(at)newshosting.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 16:32:13 UTC
Organization: Newshosting.com - Highest quality at a great price! www.newshosting.com
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 17:32:13 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 2060
 by: the dog from that fi - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 16:32 UTC

On 21/04/2022 11:00, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

>> they also have sets with their own oled panels that are apparently
>> superior to lg ones. only thing is they don't have dolby vision but not
>> to worry, sony have a model using the new samsung panel if you're happy
>> to pay the premium.
>
> AFAIK Samsung do not make their own OLED panels, but are buying 3rd grade LG ones - LG are keeping the best ones for their own sets.
>
> To be fair AFAICT the only difference is brightness, so in most scenarios they should be OK.
>
> Sony also use LG panels, but I think they get the betters ones: -
> https://www.oled-info.com/sony-oled
>

here you go
> https://www.whathifi.com/news/the-sony-a95k-qd-oled-tv-is-more-expensive-than-samsungs-own-qd-oled

these are the 'premium' ones with the new samsung oled panel.
they lack a white pixel which is found in the lg panels, they have a
layer of quantum dots, i can't even start to understand what they do but
they are apparently superior to the lg panel.

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33013&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33013

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: pamela.p...@gmail.com (Pamela)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 21:47:14 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com> <jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3395e498d8d0be2b2ebbf1c14fa1dfad";
logging-data="3371"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/cxWAT79DDYaYs3aEU56aAwE1jyunaMWQ="
User-Agent: Xnews/2009.05.01
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+r8mQlBfd/dL9fLPuvAVLLq7zRY=
 by: Pamela - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 20:47 UTC

On 08:42 21 Apr 2022, alan_m said:

> On 20/04/2022 12:11, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>> Much trumpeted especially in the USA these have now reached the
>> market.
>>
>> <link>
>>
>> On Samsung's web site the specification is incomplete, not
>> explicitly stating the ports nor even the tuner(s), a manual
>> download only gets you the first two pages and a leading trade
>> magazine reports that they will use third grade OLED panels: -
>>
>> https://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-is-still-planning-to-launch-sta
>> ndard-oled-tvs-using-lgs-cheapest-panels
>
>
> What Hifi reviewing and commenting on TVs? This often the Russ
> Andrews type bullshit.

Those hi-fi enthusiast magazines seem to assume a limitless budget.

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<b4235bd4-2e86-402b-a0c2-d385fc096e39n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33014&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33014

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:ca3:b0:452:615a:76a0 with SMTP id s3-20020a0562140ca300b00452615a76a0mr4942857qvs.70.1650711926707;
Sat, 23 Apr 2022 04:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:45a5:b0:e1:f27d:d1c8 with SMTP id
y37-20020a05687045a500b000e1f27dd1c8mr7699464oao.60.1650711926445; Sat, 23
Apr 2022 04:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 04:05:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jcfu10Fom35U1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:2414:6225:f961:d6ff;
posting-account=4hkfSwkAAADcv-_hpUK54e62WKY0FdSL
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23c4:fe80:d700:2414:6225:f961:d6ff
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<644bb15b-ccbf-4bd3-acbc-7dcb96d9eb61n@googlegroups.com> <jcc9ndF384fU1@mid.individual.net>
<f97e9ce8-5e7c-4afb-8780-707826781f15n@googlegroups.com> <jcd4gsF89teU1@mid.individual.net>
<26f92446-e9ee-4745-860d-2110eb8ab61fn@googlegroups.com> <jcfu10Fom35U1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b4235bd4-2e86-402b-a0c2-d385fc096e39n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
From: notyalck...@gmail.com (R. Mark Clayton)
Injection-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:05:26 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 12
 by: R. Mark Clayton - Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:05 UTC

On Friday, 22 April 2022 at 15:56:34 UTC+1, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 22/04/2022 15:31, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> >
> > Yes there is some confusion here. The UK model is different because AFAICT it includes a satellite tuner, not present in the US model, and presumably other differences like mains voltage etc.
> It's been ages since I saw any bit of consumer electronics that wasn't
> 100(ish) to 250(ish) volts rated ?

Now on Samsung's official UK web site: - https://www.samsung.com/uk/tvs/oled-tv/s95b-55-inch-oled-4k-smart-tv-qe55s95batxxu/

but £2k4 and spec' still incomplete.

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<59dd9118d6noise@audiomisc.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33016&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33016

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.orpheusnet.co.uk!news.orpheusnet.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 03:49:03 -0500
From: noi...@audiomisc.co.uk (Jim Lesurf)
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 10:07:11 +0100
Message-ID: <59dd9118d6noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com> <jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>
User-Agent: Pluto/3.18 (RISC OS/5.29) NewsHound/1.43-32pre3
Organization: None
Cache-Post-Path: slave.orpheusnet.co.uk!unknown@91.84.109.109
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.2 (see http://www.nntpcache.com/)
Lines: 38
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-phfZiRnppz83t5XAdLcIaCiNk9Zhavmzv7pJUSiwtPTKCJTbK3b8yK9fbN23CmeXCDQE4X1cH6IiVDJ!MNVDME3XwoJtHMdvJJ3fZ3egaK+u7MS5s5R/hjo3jfXVh0si1cySp/NEp48GVPGV7NfiIcTTma0=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3108
 by: Jim Lesurf - Sat, 23 Apr 2022 09:07 UTC

In article <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>, Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> Those hi-fi enthusiast magazines seem to assume a limitless budget.

It depends a bit on which ones you read, and the particular authors /
writers / editors. But I'd agree that I miss the days when HFN printed DIY
info, etc. And many enthusiasts assembled their system with some practical
skills, knowing which end of a soldering iron to hold, etc.[1] Different
world to today. But the basic point is that they publish what the market
wants to pay to read, and at a price that is to some extent supported by
makers being willing to send items for reviews. And over the years those
writers and editors have shifted from being amatuer entusiasts/engineers to
being pro writers/editors/owners who use the mags to make a living.[2]

Makers/designers used tom be keen to have their items reviewed as they
needed that for people to know they existed and were worth buying. But
since then some makers have avoided sending items for review because they
may get a 'bad' one, or seem unsatisfactory when compared with something
else at a much higher price and construction quality. Good components and
metal work cost more than cheap-and-cheerful.

[1] Currently enjoying a 1970s issue of HFN that had one of the first
organised listening tests to check the claims some 'golden eared' were
making about 'amplifier sounds' that didn't show up in measurements.

[2] Alas, on occasion in the past also as a way to exploit makers by also
offering 'consultantcies' on the QT prior to 'reviewing' their product in a
magazine. I *think* this has now stopped, but can't be sure of course.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33044&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33044

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: pamela.p...@gmail.com (Pamela)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:11:45 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com> <jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252> <59dd9118d6noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="4214849760920a92ff030c2891e1ed47";
logging-data="19087"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Nsee/ATrOOthWkW4H7qo8gUTfHJaXKxE="
User-Agent: Xnews/2009.05.01
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fsALhTy3cn/kVrgS//hoWba8FOk=
 by: Pamela - Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:11 UTC

On 10:07 23 Apr 2022, Jim Lesurf said:

> In article <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>, Pamela
> <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Those hi-fi enthusiast magazines seem to assume a limitless budget.
>
> It depends a bit on which ones you read, and the particular authors /
> writers / editors. But I'd agree that I miss the days when HFN
> printed DIY info, etc. And many enthusiasts assembled their system
> with some practical skills, knowing which end of a soldering iron to
> hold, etc.[1] Different world to today. But the basic point is that
> they publish what the market wants to pay to read, and at a price
> that is to some extent supported by makers being willing to send
> items for reviews. And over the years those writers and editors have
> shifted from being amatuer entusiasts/engineers to being pro
> writers/editors/owners who use the mags to make a living.[2]
>
> Makers/designers used tom be keen to have their items reviewed as
> they needed that for people to know they existed and were worth
> buying. But since then some makers have avoided sending items for
> review because they may get a 'bad' one, or seem unsatisfactory when
> compared with something else at a much higher price and construction
> quality. Good components and metal work cost more than
> cheap-and-cheerful.
>
> [1] Currently enjoying a 1970s issue of HFN that had one of the first
> organised listening tests to check the claims some 'golden eared'
> were making about 'amplifier sounds' that didn't show up in
> measurements.
>
> [2] Alas, on occasion in the past also as a way to exploit makers by
> also offering 'consultantcies' on the QT prior to 'reviewing' their
> product in a magazine. I *think* this has now stopped, but can't be
> sure of course.
>
> Jim

I can understand manufacturers wanting to flaunt their flaship models.
From what I understand, most manufacturers (not only of hifi) with a
wide range of goods produce a flagship model to set a market image but
expect the vast majority of sales & profits to come from models much
lower in the range. A flagship model might even make a loss.

That seems like typical marketing. However the editorial of magazines
such as What HiFi always give the misleading impression that upper
market models are what everybody reading must consider buying. The same
goes for smartphones and many other electronic products.

The end result of such magazines is an image of pure fantasy affordable
by only a few, while Mr and Mrs Average buy products which may not get
a single review.

I can't tell you how many articles I've read about "budget" this or
that in which the cheapes of the so-called budget models cost three or
four times the maximum price my budget stretched to.

On the other hand ... HiFi News in the 1960s and 70s was somewhat
different because there it often seemed well-heeled enthusiast
manufacturers were talking to well-heeled enthusiast buyers and they
all shared a common aim of pure excellence at any cost. Mr and Mrs
Average probably didn't read such stuff as they weren't in the market
for �5,000 amps (at a time when �5,000 was worth a lot more than
today). Intriguingly HFN journalists could still find faults with these
highly expensive models.

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<jcsb4lF6234U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33048&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33048

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: jun...@admac.myzen.co.uk (alan_m)
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 08:53:57 +0100
Organization: At Home
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <jcsb4lF6234U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>
<59dd9118d6noise@audiomisc.co.uk> <XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252>
Reply-To: news@admac.myzen.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net /YnMkUw9KCsLgtMm8vyubARkFjW8MkhQH2vaznSUdVmQmiKYBK
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0v8FsEygzTZ2di8vCUm78wpMgpc=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252>
 by: alan_m - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 07:53 UTC

On 26/04/2022 14:11, Pamela wrote:
> On 10:07 23 Apr 2022, Jim Lesurf said:
>
>> In article <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>, Pamela
>> <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Those hi-fi enthusiast magazines seem to assume a limitless budget.
>>
>> It depends a bit on which ones you read, and the particular authors /
>> writers / editors. But I'd agree that I miss the days when HFN
>> printed DIY info, etc. And many enthusiasts assembled their system
>> with some practical skills, knowing which end of a soldering iron to
>> hold, etc.[1] Different world to today. But the basic point is that
>> they publish what the market wants to pay to read, and at a price
>> that is to some extent supported by makers being willing to send
>> items for reviews. And over the years those writers and editors have
>> shifted from being amatuer entusiasts/engineers to being pro
>> writers/editors/owners who use the mags to make a living.[2]
>>
>> Makers/designers used tom be keen to have their items reviewed as
>> they needed that for people to know they existed and were worth
>> buying. But since then some makers have avoided sending items for
>> review because they may get a 'bad' one, or seem unsatisfactory when
>> compared with something else at a much higher price and construction
>> quality. Good components and metal work cost more than
>> cheap-and-cheerful.
>>
>> [1] Currently enjoying a 1970s issue of HFN that had one of the first
>> organised listening tests to check the claims some 'golden eared'
>> were making about 'amplifier sounds' that didn't show up in
>> measurements.
>>
>> [2] Alas, on occasion in the past also as a way to exploit makers by
>> also offering 'consultantcies' on the QT prior to 'reviewing' their
>> product in a magazine. I *think* this has now stopped, but can't be
>> sure of course.
>>
>> Jim
>
> I can understand manufacturers wanting to flaunt their flaship models.
> From what I understand, most manufacturers (not only of hifi) with a
> wide range of goods produce a flagship model to set a market image but
> expect the vast majority of sales & profits to come from models much
> lower in the range. A flagship model might even make a loss.
>
> That seems like typical marketing. However the editorial of magazines
> such as What HiFi always give the misleading impression that upper
> market models are what everybody reading must consider buying. The same
> goes for smartphones and many other electronic products.
>
> The end result of such magazines is an image of pure fantasy affordable
> by only a few, while Mr and Mrs Average buy products which may not get
> a single review.
>
> I can't tell you how many articles I've read about "budget" this or
> that in which the cheapes of the so-called budget models cost three or
> four times the maximum price my budget stretched to.

When in the market for a new camera I selected a few candidates in my
price range and then looked at some of the on-line in depth reviews. The
proper type reviews where they tested the performance, although there
were some personal opinions expressed.

In a review a comment would be made such as "brand X is better value for
money with a better this, that or other". There would be a link to the
brand X review and in that review a comment that "brand Y is better
value for money with a better this, that or other" and so on.

After 30 minutes of reading I reached the stage where perhaps my
original selection may have been wrong and I needed to go for
brand/model Z - until the price for brand Z was checked and found to be
x3 more than the original budget.

I now find that although I selected a relatively small camera that 99%
of my photos are now taken on my mobile phone which is a lot more
convenient to carry around.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<59dfa4fcc3noise@audiomisc.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33050&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33050

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.mixmin.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.orpheusnet.co.uk!news.orpheusnet.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 06:44:32 -0500
From: noi...@audiomisc.co.uk (Jim Lesurf)
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 10:56:51 +0100
Message-ID: <59dfa4fcc3noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com> <jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252> <59dd9118d6noise@audiomisc.co.uk> <XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252>
User-Agent: Pluto/3.18 (RISC OS/5.29) NewsHound/1.43-32pre3
Organization: None
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cache-Post-Path: slave.orpheusnet.co.uk!unknown@91.84.109.109
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.2 (see http://www.nntpcache.com/)
Lines: 67
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-7SCs9wLiEzHEfwoK0gN6ifAUpFwORIwPsr3WstYBFxF1Fxp6+hAgwSxFWtE9N93Cf6kckEWYCRKK/sD!W9wlIV7AQXbZumRvjQqvCx3x0z0jZvlDhVcR0fDfSOJAyf+SM9fdw1IWkdiVgzpFmDjqZ71VPS0=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4607
 by: Jim Lesurf - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 09:56 UTC

Largely agree with your points about a lot of the JiFi mages today. alas.
Although some more budget - put perfectly decent performance - units do get
some look it. The real loss tends to be content on other aspects. cf
below...

In article <XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252>, Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

> On the other hand ... HiFi News in the 1960s and 70s was somewhat
> different because there it often seemed well-heeled enthusiast
> manufacturers were talking to well-heeled enthusiast buyers and they
> all shared a common aim of pure excellence at any cost. Mr and Mrs
> Average probably didn't read such stuff as they weren't in the market
> for £5,000 amps (at a time when £5,000 was worth a lot more than
> today). Intriguingly HFN journalists could still find faults with these
> highly expensive models.

Not many units were 5,000 pounds in the 60s/70s! It is difficult to compare
given inflation[1], but the reality is that Hi-Fi went 'mass market' in
that period and pretty much 'everyone' (sic) got a HiFi of some sort then.
It was later on eclipsed by VCRs and Colour TV being the 'must have'.

The best sellers in terms real HiFi at the time - until the Japanese ate
the UK middle market - were items like the Armstong 500 and 600 ranges.
Although people tend to recall other names like QUAD, the Armstrong units
sold in much bigger numbers.

Comet Warehouses used to use the 521 amp as a 'loss leader'. The sold these
at a price *below* what they paid for them. Knowing that most buyers would
also want a turntable, speakers, etc, to go with it. 8-] At the time that
level of kit was apparently quite affordable for many. Sold as fast as they
could be made.

Yamaha, Sansui, etc, then undercut this.

So HFN in that period had a much wider range of content then you allow.
Including a fair bit of DIY. I'm currently re-reading some examples. Each
issue also has far more content - more pages with smaller type - covering
all aspects. e.g. regular column on patents. regular "letter from America",
etc.

Jim

[1] Above said, by c1980 things had changed. The RRP for the 700 range was
about 300 quid for the pre-amp and nearly 600 for the power amp. [2] That
translates to quite a high price nowdays! But given the spec it would be
similar to its performance/price competitors as top-of-the-range does tend
to cost more per item given the smaller market.

However this was a reaction to the Japanese taking over the mid and low
ranges of the market via their ability to mass-manufacture for the world.
Small UK companies couldn't really compete because investors in he UK
decided to put their capital into 'banking' and 'property', not making
things. The first signs of this were the way 'UK' hi-fi gradually had to
use Japanese components because no-one in the UK was willing to spend the
money to develop factories that could make better components.

[2] see
http://ukhhsoc.torrens.org/makers/Armstrong/Various/Letters/Move1981.gif

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's

<59dfa598f2noise@audiomisc.co.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=33051&group=uk.tech.digital-tv#33051

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.mixmin.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.orpheusnet.co.uk!news.orpheusnet.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 06:44:33 -0500
From: noi...@audiomisc.co.uk (Jim Lesurf)
Subject: Re: Samsung botch [re]introduction of OLED TV's
Newsgroups: uk.tech.digital-tv
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2022 11:03:31 +0100
Message-ID: <59dfa598f2noise@audiomisc.co.uk>
References: <1a7e02b6-0aaf-4201-837e-378e65c01787n@googlegroups.com>
<jccg73F4dhtU1@mid.individual.net> <XnsAE81DDA1DFBB337B93@144.76.35.252>
<59dd9118d6noise@audiomisc.co.uk> <XnsAE8590687A20A37B93@144.76.35.252> <jcsb4lF6234U1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: Pluto/3.18 (RISC OS/5.29) NewsHound/1.43-32pre3
Organization: None
Cache-Post-Path: slave.orpheusnet.co.uk!unknown@91.84.109.109
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.2 (see http://www.nntpcache.com/)
Lines: 40
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-kMq5KaRvRhTMtfj+Fqx1hhA1wW+e+zY1M1E74yN8OM0/+xgA6M0W7uUasBaCgBP7CvoB5F2l/ADMZn1!nfsgSx7AZkFzL/Jdihoc+v9iTtYC+ggZ7JQl7bN6fx9zkNjCqLqLktK179RByQMZ9HMKr0EtjbA=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3095
 by: Jim Lesurf - Wed, 27 Apr 2022 10:03 UTC

In article <jcsb4lF6234U1@mid.individual.net>, alan_m
<junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> In a review a comment would be made such as "brand X is better value for
> money with a better this, that or other". There would be a link to the
> brand X review and in that review a comment that "brand Y is better
> value for money with a better this, that or other" and so on.

> After 30 minutes of reading I reached the stage where perhaps my
> original selection may have been wrong and I needed to go for
> brand/model Z - until the price for brand Z was checked and found to be
> x3 more than the original budget.

> I now find that although I selected a relatively small camera that 99%
> of my photos are now taken on my mobile phone which is a lot more
> convenient to carry around.

Good point. Yes, that tendency also afflicts HiFi mags these days. However
a few decades ago reviews generally simply examined the unit being reviewed
and tended not to say "but unit X is 'better'". They measured, listened,
considered, and described the unit being reviewed.

Drifting to 'A is better than B' tended to grow as a consequence of
"subjective" reviews where making comparisons becomes more convenient. The
fact that in one such 'review' someone prefers A to B, whilst in another
someone else prefers B to A tends to show how shakey that can be as a
'guide'.

And TBH some mags tend to work on the basis of 'liking' items so that the
maker will go on sending new models for review, enabling more issues of the
magazine to be filled and flogged. 8-]

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor