LG 65" Ultra HDTV preview

Finally we got a name for the LG 55" and 65" Ultra HDTV and it's LA970. though I am bit surprised about this series as their 84" Ultra HDTV comes up in LM series. Here comes the detailed preview about the verdirct and release date of the 65LA970 model. *www.t3.com/reviews/lg-65la970-review

navpreetsingh459 said:
Finally we got a name for the LG 55" and 65" Ultra HDTV and it's LA970. though I am bit surprised about this series as their 84" Ultra HDTV comes up in LM series. Here comes the detailed preview about the verdirct and release date of the 65LA970 model. LG 65LA970 4K TV preview | T3

I will give you a pre-emptive "no, I don't know the pricing for this TV". However, I would expect it to be significantly cheaper than the 84LM9600 (which is 17 lakhs). In regards to the article, I would say that 55 inches would be absolute smallest screen size fit for 4K resolution. Any smaller than that, and you run into the problem of diminishing returns. To the people who still believe that 55 inches may be a bit too small to see the full benefits of 4K, just sit closer to the TV!

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

Everyone seems to be ignoring the one major flaw of the LG 4K TVs that I pointed out - No 4K upscaling engine. So unless you have 4K content to watch, Full HD content will look no better than a normal Full HD TV.

Whereas with Sony, you get the ability to upscale Full HD content to 4K and make them look better than on normal HDTVs.

LG in its turn has not equipped the 84LM960V with an upscaling feature. The TV runs on the same platform as the Full HD models from the LM960V series, and LG indicates that even the motherboard is identical. The hardware also doesn't seem to realize that the panel has four times the resolution. When we set the TV to 'scan only' with a 1080p signal, you'd expect the signal to be displayed in the middle, but instead it's full-screen employing basic bi-linear upscaling. The sharpness tests in the HQV 2.0 benchmark showed that upscaled 1080p material doesn't look sharper than on a normal 1080p screen. So in this department LG is behind Sony and Sharp, but Sony's 84-inch UHD TV is also 10,000 euros more expensive.

*uk.hardware.info/reviews/3901/3/lg-84lm960v--lg-84lm9600-uhd-tv-review-scaling-up-to-uhd

I am a bit surprised by your post because I don't think any brand will ever launch a 4K TV without a resolution upscaler. I searched a bit more on this and found that reputed tech sites like cnet and pocker-lint have said that LG 84LM9600 do have the resolution upscaler in them. check out these links LG 84LM960V 4K TV review - Pocket-lint LG 84LM9600 - Flat-panel TVs - CNET Reviews correct me If I am wrong on this.

^

Who would you rather believe ? A site that has not reviewed the TV or a site that has done thorough review of the TV, that too in LG office and posted the info they got from LG. LG itself has admitted that the motherboard and processing is the same as Full HD LM9600 then what's the point of posting cnet link ?

Also the reason why you can't find any mention of a 4K video processing engine for this TV on LG website. If you look at Sony's 84X9000 you will see the mention of 4K X-Reality PRO engine which is unique to the 4K Bravia and not shared with any Full HD Bravia.

oh, thanks for the update mate!! I thought they would name it in LM series only but they rolled out a completely new series for this. It's the first time that I got to read full specs of the 65" LG Ultra hdtv. The article more or less seems to compare this lower model with the 84" TV but i don't think the specs are going to exactly the same.. The difference in screen size may result in some differences in the features of both the TVs..

S

By looking at this tv review and as per your article reference i think these TV sets are being used to show off the superior 4K resolution and make 2013 a big year for Ultra HD televisions.

randomuser111 said:
LG itself has admitted that the motherboard and processing is the same as Full HD LM9600 then what's the point of posting cnet link ?

So are you saying that CNET isn't a reliable source for Ultra HD TV updates??

^

Is CNET bigger than LG for you?

When LG itself is saying something about its TV, you want to believe CNET? LOL

CNET is just a tech blog. And like all tech blogs, they make mistakes quite often and do not know all products inside out. Even a lot of reviews contain incorrect information without confirming with the manufacturer.

So don't treat CNET like bible, do your own research as well

How much difference will upscaling make? If the content isn't 4k I can bet upscaling it on the fly will make it look bad, just what happens if you use similar setting in powerdvd etc.

tkin said:
How much difference will upscaling make? If the content isn't 4k I can bet upscaling it on the fly will make it look bad, just what happens if you use similar setting in powerdvd etc.

From the same LG review:

"Since there won't be much native UHD material available, a lot of effort has been made with video upscaling. Sony's 84-inch TV has a special engine that compares the current frame with the next one, and tries to add extra detail that way. In a demo session at IFA Sony proved that the effect is quite impressive, the upscaled 4K image is clearly sharper than the same image on a normal Full HD TV.Sharp has a similar technology called ICC Purios in one of its upcoming 4K TVs, and what we've seen of its implementation was also impressive."
It's a shame that LG didn't invest more in the upscaling of HD material, something that Sony and Sharp do really well with their UHD models. Considering there is currently no way around the lack of better-than-Full HD material, it's hard to recommend the 84LM960V. While the screen is good and it's the cheapest 84-inch UHD TV that we've tested, the exorbitant price tag can't be ignored. If you need a TV that size, then a third of the price nets you an 80-inch Full HD TV from Sharp, which shows HD material with comparable sharpness.

Sony's 4K X-Reality Pro engine is not PowerDVD. Millions of dollars have been spent on R&D to make it work perfectly and upscale Full HD content to look as close to 4K as possible. So that comparison is just silly. Same with Sharp's 4K engine.

randomuser111 said:
From the same LG review:

"Since there won't be much native UHD material available, a lot of effort has been made with video upscaling. Sony's 84-inch TV has a special engine that compares the current frame with the next one, and tries to add extra detail that way. In a demo session at IFA Sony proved that the effect is quite impressive, the upscaled 4K image is clearly sharper than the same image on a normal Full HD TV.Sharp has a similar technology called ICC Purios in one of its upcoming 4K TVs, and what we've seen of its implementation was also impressive."
It's a shame that LG didn't invest more in the upscaling of HD material, something that Sony and Sharp do really well with their UHD models. Considering there is currently no way around the lack of better-than-Full HD material, it's hard to recommend the 84LM960V. While the screen is good and it's the cheapest 84-inch UHD TV that we've tested, the exorbitant price tag can't be ignored. If you need a TV that size, then a third of the price nets you an 80-inch Full HD TV from Sharp, which shows HD material with comparable sharpness.

Sony's 4K X-Reality Pro engine is not PowerDVD. Millions of dollars have been spent on R&D to make it work perfectly and upscale Full HD content to look as close to 4K as possible. So that comparison is just silly. Same with Sharp's 4K engine.

Well, given what you said is true (and I'm not doubting you, it's just that LG hasn't made any official announcements about it), I guess the real question is: is the difference in performance worth $7000? This isn't a rhetorical question. I would assume that if someone is going to spend $17,000 or $25,000 on a TV, money isn't really an issue for him/her. So is the extra money worth the extra performance?

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

M

No doubt that this model looks quite good but it becomes a debatable question that whether these models will be able to impress Indian customers or not?

LGWRSherlock said:
Well, given what you said is true (and I'm not doubting you, it's just that LG hasn't made any official announcements about it), I guess the real question is: is the difference in performance worth $7000? This isn't a rhetorical question. I would assume that if someone is going to spend $17,000 or $25,000 on a TV, money isn't really an issue for him/her. So is the extra money worth the extra performance?

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

We are living in India, not USA

. Both LG 84LM960 and Sony Bravia 84X9000 cost the same - In fact LG is more expensive by Rs.10

So is the loss in performance worth the extra 10Rs?

I initially had some reservations about the review from that website randomuser111 posted mostly due to the fact that no other tech site that did a hands-on review of the 84LM9600 mentioned anything of the fact that there was no dedicated 4K upscaler. My thought process was that if anyone did a proper review of the 84LM9600, he would definitely mention such a deficiency in the reviews. Due to this, I directly contacted someone who had done a hands-on review of both the Sony and the LG Ultra HD TVs (I'll leave out who this was for now, but I'll just say that he works for a very popular tech site). This person confirmed that the hardware in the 84LM9600 was indeed based on the hardware in the 55LM9600. HOWEVER, the 84LM9600 also employs two extra Pixelworks imaging processors to handle the 4K upscaler engine. Needless to say, that essentially means the hardware in the 84LM9600 and the 55LM9600 are NOT identical. The information about the two extra Pixelwork processors in the 84LM9600 actually came from LG.

Then I started to do a little digging to see if there were any website that did a hands-on review of both the Sony and LG Ultra HD TVs and pitted them against each other. Low and behold, CNET Asia had done just that. They took screenshots and pictures of both TVs displaying content from DVDs to Blu-rays to native 4K. Take a look at this review: Hands-on: Sony Bravia KD-84X9000 (84-inch LED) - TVs - CNET Asia
I think the screenshots alone should be proof enough that the LG Ultra HD TV does not lag behind the Sony Ultra HD TV at all when it comes to its 4K upscaling feature.

And randomuser111, we all know that the prices listed on the websites are the MRP, so those are subject to change when you actually purchase the product!

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

Okay well, I will contact the site myself and report back.

But fact is, LG doesn't have a 4K video processing engine. If it had, they would certainly have marketed it. Pixelwork processors may "help" but its not an engine itself. It's a 2K engine on the LM84960V.

randomuser111 said:
Okay well, I will contact the site myself and report back.

But fact is, LG doesn't have a 4K video processing engine. If it had, they would certainly have marketed it. Pixelwork processors may "help" but its not an engine itself. It's a 2K engine on the LM84960V.

But in that Cnet review that LG TV at times actually look sharper than the Sony version?

tkin said:
But in that Cnet review that LG TV at times actually look sharper than the Sony version?

Yes that's what they found. Let's wait for full fledged reviews for more details.

EDIT:

Here are reviews of both Sony and LG 4K sets from the same review site. From the info on here I think hardwareinfo guys may have got confused. LG does have upscaling feature but NOT a 4K video processing engine which has nothing much to do with upscaling. Upscaling performance on both TVs is more or lesss the same.

Anyway the overall scores for both the Sets in the reviews

2D Picture Quality

Sony - 10/10
LG - 9/10

3D Picture Quality

Sony- 10/10
LG - 9/10

Overall -

Sony - 9/10
LG - 8/10

*www.trustedreviews.com/sony-kd-84x9005_TV_review_3d-picture-performance_Page-3#tr-review-summary

*www.trustedreviews.com/lg-84lm960v_TV_review_upscaled-and-3d-images_Page-3#tr-review-summary

Woooww,,Looks like a Battle going between LG and Sony representative here. i would agree with randomuser that the prices quoted here should be INR and not in USD or Euros and i never expected that this thread will go like this. i found another tech article on digitaltrends which has reviewed the TV and that too in the LG office itself. They also claimed that the LG's upscaling quality is it's most imp trick and they have highlighted it as a high end feature of the TV. here is the link *www.digitaltrends.com/tv-reviews/lg-84lm9600-review/
I am not sure which site is to be trusted for product reviews.

randomuser111 said:
^

Is CNET bigger than LG for you?

When LG itself is saying something about its TV, you want to believe CNET? LOL

CNET is just a tech blog. And like all tech blogs, they make mistakes quite often and do not know all products inside out. Even a lot of reviews contain incorrect information without confirming with the manufacturer.

So don't treat CNET like bible, do your own research as well

I am in line with the facts you’re talking about Sony or LG 84-inch UDTV but for your kind information you said Cnet is just a tech blog and we can’t trust them. Now may I know that the source you mentioned; Is that LG's official statement? Or are we suppose to treat hardware.info as Bible? I'd suggest you to don’t try to support your statements by degrading the most trusted review sites on web.

^

HardwareInfo is not to be trusted as Bible, but they claim they have tested the TV in LG office and have pics as proof too. And please, CNET is far from the most trusted review site on the web. They have gone downhill over the years and they get bashed for most of their reviews, just read the comments under reviews. So I'd suggest you stop believing that CNET is the most trusted. They are heavily biased and sometimes down right stupid. Nobody takes CNET seriously anymore.

And frankly if I wanted to use a site to support my statement I would not degrade CNET but applaud it as CNET has stated that LG TV's have poor PQ. But I didn't do that.

randomuser111 said:
^

HardwareInfo is not to be trusted as Bible, but they claim they have tested the TV in LG office and have pics as proof too. And please, CNET is far from the most trusted review site on the web. They have gone downhill over the years and they get bashed for most of their reviews, just read the comments under reviews. So I'd suggest you stop believing that CNET is the most trusted. They are heavily biased and sometimes down right stupid. Nobody takes CNET seriously anymore.

And frankly if I wanted to use a site to support my statement I would not degrade CNET but applaud it as CNET has stated that LG TV's have poor PQ. But I didn't do that.

You guys wanted some numbers on price, so I found some for you.

LG 84LM9600 Online Price in India, Specifications, Reviews, Features : Televisions - Compare India
Sony KD-84X9000 Online Price in India, Specifications, Reviews, Features : Televisions - Compare India

As you guys may already know, this site aggregates prices of various retailers and lists them. The cheapest price for the 84LM9600 is 10,78,999 INR, and the cheapest price for the KD-84X9000 is 16,00,000 INR. Now, according to the trustedreviews site, the differences in score between the two TVs was 1. LG is 8, and Sony is 9. This time, I'll ask the question again: is the one point difference worth 5,21,000 INR?

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

Are you sure about that price sherlock??? If true then I must say its incredible value for money :thumbup:

And yes if what you posted is true, then no the extra 1 point is not worth 5 lacs

randomuser111 said:
Yes that's what they found. Let's wait for full fledged reviews for more details.

EDIT:

Here are reviews of both Sony and LG 4K sets from the same review site. From the info on here I think hardwareinfo guys may have got confused. LG does have upscaling feature but NOT a 4K video processing engine which has nothing much to do with upscaling. Upscaling performance on both TVs is more or lesss the same.

Anyway the overall scores for both the Sets in the reviews

2D Picture Quality

Sony - 10/10
LG - 9/10

3D Picture Quality

Sony- 10/10
LG - 9/10

Overall -

Sony - 9/10
LG - 8/10

Sony KD-84X9005 - 3D Picture Performance

LG 84LM960V - Upscaled and 3D Images

@randomuser11: I am getting confused by your posts now, till now you were laying so much emphasis on the review done by hardwareinfo and even claimed that the review done by Cnet is not accurate but now you have taken a U turn on what all you said ad it's a big big question mark on your credibility as well. And also on the same review done by trustedreview.com, they rank LG higher in terms of Features and value then why didn't you mentioned them in the post. It will be a lot better If we can discuss about the tech and features only instead of de-grading one brand just because you are a fan boy of the other brand.

Sorry if I hurt you ( I know you are a big LG fanboy) but if you actually read my posts properly you will realize you have misunderstood my posts completely.

1. Hardwareinfo is not a crap site, they have done the review in LG office itself and for proof you can see the photos.
After sherlock's clarification I did write that I believe hardwareinfo guys goofed up somewhere but the equal blame also goes to LG UK for not knowing about their Own product.

2. I was talking about cnet in general and did not say anywhere that the cnet asia 4k comparo review was biased or crap or wrong, which LGsherlock posted

3. Features are not key when buying a TV. The most important criteria is picture quality only.

4. In India both LG and Sony 4k sets cost the same so the value score cannot apply in India। In UK yes, but we are in India. LGSherlock mentioned that the LG set can be bought for far cheaper than its MRP but we cannot be 100% sure, I have myself been lured by such low prices on compareindia but when you actually call them they give 101 reasons that the price advertised was for special cases etc. Maybe Im wrong but we cant know for sure. If its true then sure I myself said it earlier and I will say it again - If indeed LG 4k set is 10 lac then I will give it 10/10 for value and 7/10 to Sony.

randomuser111 said:
Sorry if I hurt you ( I know you are a big LG fanboy) but if you actually read my posts properly you will realize you have misunderstood my posts completely.

1. Hardwareinfo is not a crap site, they have done the review in LG office itself and for proof you can see the photos.
After sherlock's clarification I did write that I believe hardwareinfo guys goofed up somewhere but the equal blame also goes to LG UK for not knowing about their Own product.

2. I was talking about cnet in general and did not say anywhere that the cnet asia 4k comparo review was biased or crap or wrong, which LGsherlock posted

3. Features are not key when buying a TV. The most important criteria is picture quality only.

4. In India both LG and Sony 4k sets cost the same so the value score cannot apply in India। In UK yes, but we are in India. LGSherlock mentioned that the LG set can be bought for far cheaper than its MRP but we cannot be 100% sure, I have myself been lured by such low prices on compareindia but when you actually call them they give 101 reasons that the price advertised was for special cases etc. Maybe Im wrong but we cant know for sure. If its true then sure I myself said it earlier and I will say it again - If indeed LG 4k set is 10 lac then I will give it 10/10 for value and 7/10 to Sony.

*jgroome.com/kindlerage/res/yao.png

Good to see sony embrace passive 3d and really has done a great job at that.

Passive 3d is the future of 3d and will pave way for lenticular displays in future.

Instead of being called a LG Fan boy, I would say that I adrmire the tech used by LG and many times I have recommended Sony and Samsung to users so I consider myself an independent bird who can fly anywhere. I am also confused how LG Guyz also don't know about their products, may be Sherlock can explain this thing in a more better way to us. And yes, If the tv is available at the price mentioned by sherlock then i don't think it's a bad deal. even naaptol has listed the same model at 12,50,000 INR but the model is not available for sale.
LG 84-inch LM9600 Ultra Definition Cinema 3D Smart LED TV Price - Buy LG 84-inch LM9600 Ultra Definition Cinema 3D Smart LED TV Price in India, Best Prices n Review

sumit_anand said:
Instead of being called a LG Fan boy, I would say that I adrmire the tech used by LG and many times I have recommended Sony and Samsung to users so I consider myself an independent bird who can fly anywhere. I am also confused how LG Guyz also don't know about their products, may be Sherlock can explain this thing in a more better way to us. And yes, If the tv is available at the price mentioned by sherlock then i don't think it's a bad deal. even naaptol has listed the same model at 12,50,000 INR but the model is not available for sale.
LG 84-inch LM9600 Ultra Definition Cinema 3D Smart LED TV Price - Buy LG 84-inch LM9600 Ultra Definition Cinema 3D Smart LED TV Price in India, Best Prices n Review

Chill buddy, I didn't mean that in a wrong way. Nothing wrong in being a fanboy as long as you are not a blind fanboy. Which you are not.

LGWRManSherlock is an LG representative (so a lil more than LG fanboy hahaha) but he's still cool and everybody likes him

. Me included.

As for the compareIndia price, sadly they don't sell any product. But just a place for dealers to post attractive prices and get customers. So those prices just can't be trusted. Same for naaptol as it's not for sale. Anybody can sign up on compareIndia and post a good price..

As for LG showroom and other electronics retailers I know the price is closer to MRP and definitely not as low as on compareIndia.

randomuser111 said:
^

HardwareInfo is not to be trusted as Bible, but they claim they have tested the TV in LG office and have pics as proof too. And please, CNET is far from the most trusted review site on the web. They have gone downhill over the years and they get bashed for most of their reviews, just read the comments under reviews. So I'd suggest you stop believing that CNET is the most trusted. They are heavily biased and sometimes down right stupid. Nobody takes CNET seriously anymore.

And frankly if I wanted to use a site to support my statement I would not degrade CNET but applaud it as CNET has stated that LG TV's have poor PQ. But I didn't do that.

In my experience you’re the first person who is so confidently saying such things about Cnet, I agree they might have done some errors at times but I think this is not enough to say for a source like Cnet that they are not trustworthy or heavily biased! And secondly like you said in one you post above that

I think Hardwareinfo guys may have gotten confused.

This again is an example of human error so there wouldn’t be any sense if I’ll start saying about Hardwareinfo that they are not trustworthy and all.

And as far as the prices are concerned I won’t comment about any of them by the time I’ll get any relevant source to present, but after going through above comments made by LG representative, you and some other forum members I got this link on Indiatimes Buy LG 84-inch LCD 3D Smart TV-84LM9600 online, LG 84-inch LCD 3D Smart TV-84LM9600 Price, Reviews @ Indiatimes Shopping for LG 84LM9600 price which indicates that this model is available at much cheaper prices than its launched price and above all its IN STOCK FOR SALE at this price however, yet to do a bit more search for the price of Sony 84-inch model.

^

LOL. They even couldn't find the right picture of the TV. Hahahahaha

And as for CNET, they ARE crap. No two ways about it. Sometimes they are good, but most of the times not.

Anyway I guess it can sitll be a good proof but I'd say you go and enquire about the price at LG showroom or any multi brand electronics showroom to be sure.

I have observed your comments since from the start of this thread you were interchanging your statements so often and that shows the level of understanding for any subject you have. At this stage I would say you should rather present logical proof to favor your statement instead.

And if CNET IS CRAP then I believe whatever they are posting for Sony is also crap, then why many times Sony guys go for their reviews and recommend others to follow CNET? Now don’t tell me that Sony never follows CNET in either way please. And I guess there is no worth of arguing about this topic anymore since the original matter regarding upscaling PQ was already discussed very well before.

Now, now, everyone. Let's not get into a flame war. Where's the love, y'all? More specifically, our love for excellent TVs, whether they're LG, Sony, Samsung or whoever.

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

LGWRSherlock said:
Now, now, everyone. Let's not get into a flame war. Where's the love, y'all? More specifically, our love for excellent TVs, whether they're LG, Sony, Samsung or whoever.

LG WRman Sherlock, out!

Hahaha “flame war” that’s funny! And to be honest here I’ll go with you as our love is for excellent products and technology no matter whether they are from Sony, Samsung, LG and Panasonic etc. They all are electronic industry leaders and always come-in-front with incredible products!