On today ’s You Asked : Can you get great surround if your back is literally against the rampart ? What makes reference monitors so crazy expensive , and which TV gets closest to that kind of picture caliber ? Why do n’t OLED TVs matter less ? And is n’t this say to be the future ?
Why are reference monitors so expensive?
Tyler asks : What differences justify the crazy Leontyne Price tag of diligence equipment like reference / master monitors compare to mellow - end base telly ’s ? And which of those professional feature article do you see coming into the home in class to descend ? ( Bonus Q ! What television receiver do you think add up closest to reference monitor image character ? )
Here ’s the thing about super - fancy reference monitors : very few of them are sold — at least relative to the number of tv set that get sell . They are a specialty , niche product that only a few people need . Also , the engineering in these reference varan is highly specific and not suitable for consumer use .
Whether it ’s a dual - cell LCD or a dead on target RGB OLED , those display technology are n’t appropriate for home use because by their nature they do n’t incline to get shiny enough for consumer without a whole lot of very expensive help . Also , reference monitors generally are not with child enough for most folks ’ home use . And they let in telecasting connexion that are of little to no use for consumers .
And there are only few options out there — so not a ton of competition to help drive cost down . Plus , consider about who they are being deal to — Hollywood family and topnotch - gamy - end creators . They necessitate what they need and will pay what they have to in gild to get it . I entail , it ’s a business organization expense that becomes a tax write - off , which sort of demand some of the sting out of spending $ 30,000 dollars on something , I imagine . At least in the U.S.
As for your incentive question ? Well , that ’s really what some of us reviewer are trying to enter out , right ? That ’s what some television shootouts are pore around — observe out which television puzzle closest to the reference standard . Last year , it was generally agreed on that theSony A95Lgot close . This year , with Sony ’s new 4,000 - nit varan , we ’ll see . It could be the A95L , but some have theLG G4 in the ring . TheBravia 9 has a lot live on for it .
Aren’t OLED TVs supposed to be lighter?
Lewis from Mission , Texas , writes : When OLED technology was first announced , it was said that this young technology would enable manufacturers to raise lighter - weight monitors and TVs . He then goes on to repoint out that a 2019 50 - in Vizio television set he had was just under 20 pounds while the 48 - inch KTC OLED monitor he ’s interchange it with is about 35 pound sterling . So what happen ?
Well , Lewis , I remember OLED being gas in a like manner . organic light-emitting diode has run to extremely thin telecasting — the gore have fewer layers and they do n’t need room for backlights . But there are two reasons I ’m mindful of that prevent OLED displays from getting a whole lot light than they are now . One is that OLED dialog box use both glassful substrates and encapsulation spyglass . The glass substrate is part of the core functionality of the board , and the encapsulation glassful helps protect the display . Glass is heavy , and that contributes to the weightiness .
I also call up that as demand for higher and high light has ramped up , so , too , have the top executive supplying . Power supplies are heavy . They are part of what hit Class A / bacillus A / V recipient so heavy , for model .
There ’s also the matter of using premium cloth . sullen material often are used to give the video and supervise some structure so they are more set . And as a bonus , they do n’t find like a tinny toy .
But there are a twain of other factors to take into consideration , too : Today ’s OLEDs are way lighter than the Plasma displays they direct to substitute . So they deliver on the lighter display promise in that direction . Also , keep in thinker that premium QLED TVs are similarly heavy , too . A 50 - in SamsungQN90Dwithout its stand is 30 pounds — not that far off from a similarly sized organic light-emitting diode TV.But you may buy a much chintzy 50 - inch Samsung like the TU7000 and it will count under 25 Irish pound . Generally , the more agiotage the television or monitor , the more it will consider .
I know a lot of advances are being made in materials scientific discipline , but it seems like the A / volt proverb that you may pronounce a product ’s calibre by how much it weighs still … well , holds some weight . hem … sorry . ( Not sorry . )
How to achieve surround sound with your back against the wall
Avedis indite : I was enquire what you might advocate for a receiver / loudspeaker system / sub jazz band with ceiling speakers for Dolby Atmos for an apartment . The flat is mine and I do n’t mind running cables in the wall for all the speakers . The bread and butter room is n’t huge and the sofa is back against a wall , so minimalistic front and rearward Speaker are recommended and sooner paries mountable although the last part is not a show - stopper . Considering all of this , I would say sound clarity and Dolby effect is more all important than intelligent meretriciousness . For some reason , I ’m put to consecrate speakers with a receiver alternatively of a sound legal community purely because I do n’t believe the speech sound bar will give the needed dome of intelligent gist . But then Avedis added a bonus question : Do you think the new Sony Bravia Theatre Quad will be as efficient with a Samsung or LG TV ? Or will it be upright to pair with only a Sony video ?
All this prison term I ’ve been thinking Avedis was drained set on conventional speakers and a liquidator , but it now it seems they may be heart-to-heart to the idea of the Theatre Quad , which is capital news program . But we ’ll get back to that .
have ’s just take a moment to talk about the restriction of having a wall decent behind your seating surface area . Most conventional talker and A / vanadium recipient , or even high - end preamp central processor and amplifiers rely on some somewhat specific utterer placement in rules of order to achieve the most convincing , accurate surroundings - strait experience .
That specific placement take putting the surround speakers just behind you and to your side — kind of back at your 8- and 4 - o’clock position . And if you were going to have surround back utterer , those would go well behind you in the BACK of the room , firing right in your listening area .
The position of the Atmos surroundings speakers , again , ideally , and if they were discharge down at you , would be just in front of the hearing arena , and just outside the edges of the hearing area bound , and then again in a similar location just behind the hearing orbit . This diagram from Dolbyoutlines that .
Now , there ’s always some squirm room . And a receiver can correct for less than approximation speaker aloofness and it can also help some with frequency response correction if your room does n’t fathom great . But if your back is against a wall , you ca n’t locate anything behind you . So you will have to make some compromises . Generally , I remember endeavor to put surround back TV channel up on the rampart directly behind you is n’t move to help oneself you achieve the essence those television channel are imply to create . But if you were to do it anyway , I ’d suggest a dipole verbalizer so that the sound was n’t directly localizable to the speaker itself . A dipole antenna will facilitate make the source of the sound less obvious or spread out .
And you may place the main surroundings off to the sides . It wo n’t give you as immersive an consequence as if they were slightly behind you and take aim at your hearing field , but it will occupy in the sound a bit and it can still voice groovy — it ’s a lot of merriment .
For Atmos channel , though ? Well , you may go with two , and place them in the room out in front of the hearing position , like what we see in this diagram . But a second set of Atmos speakers ? Well , does n’t make a ton of sense to me . That bonce of sound is n’t going to extend behind you the way it is meant to . I just do n’t see a band of value in trying to do that .
So , for the speaker data formatting and placement of a ceremonious talker system , I ’d plan on a 5.1.2 frame-up where the environs are get up and off to each side , and the two Atmos verbalizer are placed in front of your hearing area and off to the sides a bit , but not all the way to the side wall .
From there — what speakers should you get ? frankly , that ’s the variety of inquiry I do n’t stress to answer . There are tons of option , and to give you a unspoilt recommendation , I take you to serve a crew more questions . That ’s a consultation , my supporter , and I just ca n’t do consultation here .
However , you expressed interest in the Theatre Quad . That is on the dot the variety of system I recall would work best for someone with speaker positioning restriction , because that is exactly what it is designed to handle . Dolby Atmos Flex connect also endeavor to do something alike — we just do n’t have a gross ton of experience with those systems yet . Hopefully we start seeing some come out soon .
But , right now , Sony and its 360 Spatial Sound Mapping applied science are the ticket , in my opinion . That organisation is designed to employ processing and psychoacoustics to create an exceedingly realistic , win over Dolby Atmos surround experience in a number of super challenging weather condition . And it does that problem exceptionally well .
Come to think of it , you could get that out of a Sony A / V pass catcher . So I would design on getting a Sony A / V liquidator with whatever speakers you choose to get .
But theTheatre Quadis just such a versatile , easy - to - seat scheme . I ’m drop dead to recommend it to 90 % of family line who have their backbone against a paries in an flat because it delivers the goods . I might commonly also urge Sonos for such a thing . But Sonos is having some issues right now , so I ’m loath to do that at the moment .
As for the “ efficiency ” of the Theatre Quad with a non - Sony telly : The Theatre Quad will work well with any TV that can surpass Dolby Atmos via eARC . ( And if your TV passes DTS :X too , all the better . ) You will get the full sonic experience . What you will not get is a gang of on - telly control for the sound system , or the opportunity to use Acoustic Center Sync , which apply the TV speakers to enhance the center channel . But I ’m rarely going to recommend using Acoustic Center Sync anyway , and the Theatre Quad comes with a remote control , plus the Sony Bravia app can avail control the rest . So , you might not get fuddled TV integration , but the sum of what you need the Theatre Quad to do , it will do with an LG TV . It will also ferment with a Samsung TV , but you wo n’t be nonplus DTS .
