60 hz versus 120 hz versus 240 hz lcd televisions.

[techs]

I see that many manufacturers have gone to 120 hz and some are now at 240 hz on their LCD televisions.
For, say, a 50 inch LCD is there a difference? Are there any real advantages or disadvantages to the new higher numbers?

 

[PurdueRy]

Unless you enjoy the frame interpolation feature which smooths motion between frames by inserting new ones in between, then the only advantage is with sources that can output 24Hz (Blu-ray).

For these sources, you won't get frame rate judder due to 3:2 pulldown required to show 24FPS on a 60FPS set. Instead it shows 5:5(120 Hz) or higher depending on the refresh rate of the set.

 

[pennylane]

I have a 120Hz set and I 24fps blu-ray movies are excellent on it. I never use the frame interpolation, but the lack of frame rate judder still makes 120Hz worth it for me.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: pennylane
I have a 120Hz set and I 24fps blu-ray movies are excellent on it. I never use the frame interpolation, but the lack of frame rate judder still makes 120Hz worth it for me.

Ah, so it gives a better picture using BluRay.
Does it help motion blur on regular HD broadcasts like I see them touting?

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: pennylane
I have a 120Hz set and I 24fps blu-ray movies are excellent on it. I never use the frame interpolation, but the lack of frame rate judder still makes 120Hz worth it for me.

Ah, so it gives a better picture using BluRay.
Does it help motion blur on regular HD broadcasts like I see them touting?

No

 

[erwos]

"Better picture" strikes me as the wrong way to describe the benefit of 120hz... "smoother video" is probably more accurate.

I have no idea what the point of 240hz is, except for even "better" (read: "worse") motion interpolation schemes.

 

[spidey07]

The motion blur you see on HD broadcasts is compression.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: spidey07
The motion blur you see on HD broadcasts is compression.

Not entirely. LCD is just inheriently a "juddery" technology when it comes to fast pans across the screen.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: erwos
"Better picture" strikes me as the wrong way to describe the benefit of 120hz... "smoother video" is probably more accurate.

I have no idea what the point of 240hz is, except for even "better" (read: "worse") motion interpolation schemes.

Some of it is the consumers view that bigger numbers=better. Also the 3D fad is another reason for higher hz.

Consumer electronics companies spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to make their product stand out even if it really does not change things much. They already have LCD large enough for most people, 1080p is common now, sound support is good. So they are left with the question of what can they do to make consumers replace the sets they already have.

"Replace that old 42" 60hz LCD with the new better 120Hz LCD"

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: erwos
"Better picture" strikes me as the wrong way to describe the benefit of 120hz... "smoother video" is probably more accurate.

I have no idea what the point of 240hz is, except for even "better" (read: "worse") motion interpolation schemes.

Some of it is the consumers view that bigger numbers=better. Also the 3D fad is another reason for higher hz.

Consumer electronics companies spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to make their product stand out even if it really does not change things much. They already have LCD large enough for most people, 1080p is common now, sound support is good. So they are left with the question of what can they do to make consumers replace the sets they already have.

"Replace that old 42" 60hz LCD with the new better 120Hz LCD"

Shampoo marketing is what I call it


"Now with sleek new packaging"

 

[Juddog]

The thing that disappoints me is that I was hoping to use a higher end LCD set as a computer monitor with a 240hz refresh rate; sadly it doesn't work like that, your computer input is still limited to 60 Hz from every one I've seen so far with a VGA input.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Juddog
The thing that disappoints me is that I was hoping to use a higher end LCD set as a computer monitor with a 240hz refresh rate; sadly it doesn't work like that, your computer input is still limited to 60 Hz from every one I've seen so far with a VGA input.

Why can't you use a hdmi or dvi connector?

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Juddog
The thing that disappoints me is that I was hoping to use a higher end LCD set as a computer monitor with a 240hz refresh rate; sadly it doesn't work like that, your computer input is still limited to 60 Hz from every one I've seen so far with a VGA input.

Why can't you use a hdmi or dvi connector?

won't help. The signal into the display is still 60hz the so called 240hz is just internal refresh rate.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Juddog
The thing that disappoints me is that I was hoping to use a higher end LCD set as a computer monitor with a 240hz refresh rate; sadly it doesn't work like that, your computer input is still limited to 60 Hz from every one I've seen so far with a VGA input.

Why can't you use a hdmi or dvi connector?

won't help. The signal into the display is still 60hz the so called 240hz is just internal refresh rate.

ok

 

[fatdragondzc]

Is a lcd with a higher hz better than a plasma? Sorry if my question is out of place. I'm planning on getting a new TV set and I don't know about the whole hz on lcd vs plasma.

 

[TheAdvocate]

No, In layman's terms: Plasma has no need of that tech. You're not going to encounter motion issues on a plasma. The plasma makers, instead of explaining that, are now pitching "600 Hz subdrive", which is also shampoo marketing. The simple answer is that while LCDs are getting better in the area of fast motion compensation, it's very difficult for your eyes to notice the difference, and its never been an issue for plasma. (FWIW - I own 2 LCDs and 1 plasma).

BTW, before I finally settled on my Panny 54" Viera S1, I almost bought a Samsung LN-52B750. That's a pretty damn nice LCD. Great picture. Actually stands out, when they all start looking the same after hours of shopping.

After the initial wow factor on the side lit Sammy LED's, I started to notice how cartoonish the picture was with lots of noticeable blooming. Usually you read these criticisms on AVS or wherever, and they're sometimes hard to notice, but the weaknesses of those sets is readily apparent.

PS - If I were going to make a general rec for a great all around TV - I'd go with the 50" Viera G15 - It's a thinner version of the G10, and can be had for the same price. If they already made a 54", I would have gotten that.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate
No, In layman's terms: Plasma has no need of that tech. You're not going to encounter motion issues on a plasma. The plasma makers, instead of explaining that, are now pitching "600 Hz subdrive", which is also shampoo marketing. The simple answer is that while LCDs are getting better in the area of fast motion compensation, it's very difficult for your eyes to notice the difference, and its never been an issue for plasma. (FWIW - I own 2 LCDs and 1 plasma).

BTW, before I finally settled on my Panny 54" Viera S1, I almost bought a Samsung LN-52B750. That's a pretty damn nice LCD. Great picture. Actually stands out, when they all start looking the same after hours of shopping.

After the initial wow factor on the side lit Sammy LED's, I started to notice how cartoonish the picture was with lots of noticeable blooming. Usually you read these criticisms on AVS or wherever, and they're sometimes hard to notice, but the weaknesses of those sets is readily apparent.

PS - If I were going to make a general rec for a great all around TV - I'd go with the 50" Viera G15 - It's a thinner version of the G10, and can be had for the same price. If they already made a 54", I would have gotten that.

Actually LCD and plasma can both use the technology as 3:2 pulldown is something we'd all like to avoid. I think people associate 120Hz as fixing the motion blur issue on LCDs which it does not.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate
No, In layman's terms: Plasma has no need of that tech. You're not going to encounter motion issues on a plasma. The plasma makers, instead of explaining that, are now pitching "600 Hz subdrive", which is also shampoo marketing. The simple answer is that while LCDs are getting better in the area of fast motion compensation, it's very difficult for your eyes to notice the difference, and its never been an issue for plasma. (FWIW - I own 2 LCDs and 1 plasma).

BTW, before I finally settled on my Panny 54" Viera S1, I almost bought a Samsung LN-52B750. That's a pretty damn nice LCD. Great picture. Actually stands out, when they all start looking the same after hours of shopping.

After the initial wow factor on the side lit Sammy LED's, I started to notice how cartoonish the picture was with lots of noticeable blooming. Usually you read these criticisms on AVS or wherever, and they're sometimes hard to notice, but the weaknesses of those sets is readily apparent.

PS - If I were going to make a general rec for a great all around TV - I'd go with the 50" Viera G15 - It's a thinner version of the G10, and can be had for the same price. If they already made a 54", I would have gotten that.

Actually LCD and plasma can both use the technology as 3:2 pulldown is something we'd all like to avoid. I think people associate 120Hz as fixing the motion blur issue on LCDs which it does not.

Yeah. In fact many retailers web sites say that the 120 and 240 technology fixes motion blur.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: TheAdvocate
No, In layman's terms: Plasma has no need of that tech. You're not going to encounter motion issues on a plasma. The plasma makers, instead of explaining that, are now pitching "600 Hz subdrive", which is also shampoo marketing. The simple answer is that while LCDs are getting better in the area of fast motion compensation, it's very difficult for your eyes to notice the difference, and its never been an issue for plasma. (FWIW - I own 2 LCDs and 1 plasma).

BTW, before I finally settled on my Panny 54" Viera S1, I almost bought a Samsung LN-52B750. That's a pretty damn nice LCD. Great picture. Actually stands out, when they all start looking the same after hours of shopping.

After the initial wow factor on the side lit Sammy LED's, I started to notice how cartoonish the picture was with lots of noticeable blooming. Usually you read these criticisms on AVS or wherever, and they're sometimes hard to notice, but the weaknesses of those sets is readily apparent.

PS - If I were going to make a general rec for a great all around TV - I'd go with the 50" Viera G15 - It's a thinner version of the G10, and can be had for the same price. If they already made a 54", I would have gotten that.

Actually LCD and plasma can both use the technology as 3:2 pulldown is something we'd all like to avoid. I think people associate 120Hz as fixing the motion blur issue on LCDs which it does not.

Yeah. In fact many retailers web sites say that the 120 and 240 technology fixes motion blur.

Yeah...I'm not exactly sure how they claim the internal sampling rate affects pixel response time. Leave that up to marketing...

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Yeah...I'm not exactly sure how they claim the internal sampling rate affects pixel response time. Leave that up to marketing...

240Hz requires under 4 millisecond of refresh no? There is no panel capable of that yet?

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Yeah...I'm not exactly sure how they claim the internal sampling rate affects pixel response time. Leave that up to marketing...

240Hz requires under 4 millisecond of refresh no? There is no panel capable of that yet?

I doubt there is.
They often list response time as from gray to gray instead of the black to white that broadcasters use, another marketing trick.. So the actual response time is much higher, usually 2x - 3x more.


When they say 240hz they mean that the lcd divides time into 240 slices per second . So 24fps video divides evenly in 240 , 10 times, so every 10th slice it updates the frame.

Newer controllers are capable of displaying the exact same picture with no pulldown on a 60hz LCD. The newer controllers don't use integer math. Instead they use floating point math. Framerate of the source no longer matters as long as it stays below 60 fps. The hz rate becomes a maximum redraw of 60 times a seconds, but anything from 1 to 60 times a second becomes possible at any increment. So the tv displays a frame every 2.5 slices. It no longer needs to be a integer. We were stuck with the frame problem due to limitation of CRT tv , they couldn't do variable refresh rates. LCD controllers that could do the necessary calculations were expensive until recently. The problem with the new controllers is that they require a sync clock signal in the data stream and that is part of the next video spec, not the current one.

The sync signal allows the controller to buffer a second or two of video then display them as complete seconds of video rather than individual frames. So instead of the television displaying frames, it displays units or blocks of video that it has been told make up 1 second or two seconds and can adjust the display of those frames to match the source.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: sdifox

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Yeah...I'm not exactly sure how they claim the internal sampling rate affects pixel response time. Leave that up to marketing...

240Hz requires under 4 millisecond of refresh no? There is no panel capable of that yet?

I doubt there is.
They often list response time as from gray to gray instead of the black to white that broadcasters use, another marketing trick.. So the actual response time is much higher, usually 2x - 3x more.


When they say 240hz they mean that the lcd divides time into 240 slices per second . So 24fps video divides evenly in 240 , 10 times, so every 10th slice it updates the frame.

Newer controllers are capable of displaying the exact same picture with no pulldown on a 60hz LCD. The newer controllers don't use integer math. Instead they use floating point math. Framerate of the source no longer matters as long as it stays below 60 fps. The hz rate becomes a maximum redraw of 60 times a seconds, but anything from 1 to 60 times a second becomes possible at any increment. So the tv displays a frame every 2.5 slices. It no longer needs to be a integer. We were stuck with the frame problem due to limitation of CRT tv , they couldn't do variable refresh rates. LCD controllers that could do the necessary calculations were expensive until recently. The problem with the new controllers is that they require a sync clock signal in the data stream and that is part of the next video spec, not the current one.

The sync signal allows the controller to buffer a second or two of video then display them as complete seconds of video rather than individual frames. So instead of the television displaying frames, it displays units or blocks of video that it has been told make up 1 second or two seconds and can adjust the display of those frames to match the source.

I love Dynamic Contrast Ratio :laugh:

I fully expect Monster Cable to come out with an HDMI cable uber enhanced to track the time code correctly...

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: sdifox
[

I love Dynamic Contrast Ratio :laugh:

I fully expect Monster Cable to come out with an HDMI cable uber enhanced to track the time code correctly...

LOL, they probably will.
"Only monster cable can sync the video correctly"

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: sdifox
[

I love Dynamic Contrast Ratio :laugh:

I fully expect Monster Cable to come out with an HDMI cable uber enhanced to track the time code correctly...

LOL, they probably will.
"Only monster cable can sync the video correctly"

"I always specify Monster Cable for all my pacemakers"
Dr. Bombay

 

[funboy6942]

You can go on ebay and pick up some of the 3d glasses and movies and watch them in 3d provided your tv is 120htz or faster.